MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985536354 · doi:10.3791/52101

Long-term Time Lapse Imaging of Mouse Cochlear Explants

2014· article· en· W1985536354 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna F. Mulvaney, Alain Dabdoub

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicbioluminescence and chemiluminescence research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExplant cultureCochleaLive cell imagingSOX2Embryonic stem cellIncubatorMicroscopeBiologyCell biologyPathologyAnatomyMedicineGeneticsIn vitroCellGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here we present a method for long-term time-lapse imaging of live embryonic mouse cochlear explants. The developmental program responsible for building the highly ordered, complex structure of the mammalian cochlea proceeds for around ten days. In order to study changes in gene expression over this period and their response to pharmaceutical or genetic manipulation, long-term imaging is necessary. Previously, live imaging has typically been limited by the viability of explanted tissue in a humidified chamber atop a standard microscope. Difficulty in maintaining optimal conditions for culture growth with regard to humidity and temperature has placed limits on the length of imaging experiments. A microscope integrated into a modified tissue culture incubator provides an excellent environment for long term-live imaging. In this method we demonstrate how to establish embryonic mouse cochlear explants and how to use an incubator microscope to conduct time lapse imaging using both bright field and fluorescent microscopy to examine the behavior of a typical embryonic day (E) 13 cochlear explant and Sox2, a marker of the prosensory cells of the cochlea, over 5 days.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicbioluminescence and chemiluminescence researchFrench-language works237,207