MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1844424633 · doi:10.1101/pdb.prot083741

Isolation of Pure Nuclei Using a Sucrose Method

2015· article· en· W1844424633 on OpenAlexaff
Arash Nabbi, Karl Riabowol

Bibliographic record

VenueCold Spring Harbor Protocols · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsotonicHomogenization (climate)CentrifugationSucroseChemistryIsolation (microbiology)ChromatographyBiochemistryBiologyBioinformaticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This protocol describes a modified version of a widely used method to isolate nuclei from tissue culture cells. It involves mechanical homogenization of cells in isotonic sucrose, followed by velocity centrifugation of nuclei through a denser layer of sucrose. This method, which yields highly pure and intact nuclei, can be optimized for use in various types of tissues and cells. Limitations of the method, alternative options for homogenization, and recommendations for the use of detergents are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.013

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCold Spring Harbor ProtocolsSame topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207