MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971931393 · doi:10.1002/pmic.200300820

Two‐dimensional gel electrophoresis database of murine R1 embryonic stem cells

2004· article· en· W1971931393 on OpenAlexaff
Steven T. Elliott, David G. Crider, Christopher P. Garham, Kenneth R. Boheler, Jennifer E. Van Eyk

Bibliographic record

VenuePROTEOMICS · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbryonic stem cellBiologyProteomicsInduced pluripotent stem cellCellular differentiationGel electrophoresisCell biologyCell cultureStem cellMolecular biologyPopulationGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embryonic stem (ES) cell lines represent a population of undifferentiated pluripotent cells capable of multilineage differentiation in vitro. Although very useful for studying developmental processes, human ES cell lines have also been suggested as a potential and unlimited source for cellular transplantation and the treatment of human disease. The proteomic basis of embryonic stemness (pluripotentiality and multilineage differentiation) and the transitions that lead to specific cell lineages however, remain to be defined. As an important first step in defining these processes, we have performed a proteomic analysis of undifferentiated mouse R1 ES cell lines using pH 3-10, 4-7 and 6-11 two-dimensional electrophoresis gels, matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization and tandem mass spectrometry. Of the 700 gel spots analyzed, 241 distinct protein species were identified corresponding to 218 unique proteins, with a significant proportion functionally related to protein expression.

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)0.000
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations57
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePROTEOMICSSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207