MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974492976 · doi:10.1080/15459624.2012.666138

The Development and Validation of an Assay for the Quantification of the <i>P. chrysogenum</i> allergen Pch52

2012· article· en· W1974492976 on OpenAlexafffund
Chunhua Shi, Don Belisle, Shari Levac, J. David Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Canadian institutionsParacel LaboratoriesCarleton University
FundersNational Academy of SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsPenicillium chrysogenumAllergenPolyclonal antibodiesDetection limitChromatographyChemistryCross-reactivityCross reactionsBiologyAntibodyImmunologyAllergyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penicillium chrysogenum clade 4, is a common mold on damp building materials. A capture ELISA assay for the major allergen from P. chrysogenum Pch52 has been developed and tested in house dust samples and potential cross-reactivity examined. Minimal cross-reactivity with other relevant indoor fungi was observed for the assay following thorough purification of the monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies. The limit of quantification for ELISA analysis of Pch52 in sieved house dust is comparable to other assays of other fungi. The LOQ for Pch52 was 0.31 ng/mL in solution or 110 ng/g dust. The LOQ for Asp f1 and Alt a1 were 2.2 ng/g and 17 ng/g, respectively. These results indicate this assay is suitable for the quantification of Pch52 in sieved house dust.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental HygieneSame topicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial ExposureFrench-language works237,207