Interleukin-10 concentration determined by sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay is unrepresentative of bioactivity in murine blood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two experiments were performed, each using six male and six female C57BL/6J mice collectively ranging from 4 wk to 17 mo of age. Blood was obtained following CO2 anesthesia, and the IL-10 concentration of each serum sample was determined both by sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and by bioassay. In the first experiment, mean serum IL-10 immunoactivity was 9.3 pg/ml while the mean bioactivity was 700 times greater, i.e., 6.5 ng/ml. However, the bioassay required sample dilution, which might have released bound cytokine that the ELISA could also detect. In the second experiment, therefore, the ELISA was applied to samples diluted to 20% as for the bioassay. Nevertheless, the immunoassay continued to detect only a small fraction of the serum IL-10 identified by the bioassay (mean values: 32.4 pg/ml vs. 2.6 ng/ml). Although currently the preferred method, the sandwich ELISA is inappropriate for quantification of blood IL-10 concentrations. Moreover, studies of the actions of IL-10 are needed at the concentrations revealed in the blood by bioassay and currently considered supraphysiological.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".