MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986087532 · doi:10.1080/bih.76.1.3.9

Rapid plastic embedding is compatible with colorimetric detection following whole mount in situ hybridization in plant specimens

2001· article· en· W1986087532 on OpenAlexafffund
A. J. Reid, A. C. Rogers, John S. Greenwood

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnic & Histochemistry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of WaterlooSveriges Lantbruksuniversitet
KeywordsNucleic acidIn situIn situ hybridizationChemistryDehydrationChromatographyBiochemistryOrganic chemistryMessenger RNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In performing in situ hybridizations, nonisotopic nucleic acid labeling coupled with colorimetric detection offers a safer, easier and more rapid alternative to using radioactively labeled nucleic acid probes and microscopic autoradiography. Whole mount in situ hybridization is also advantageous, because many samples can be processed identically and the reduced handling of specimens greatly reduces the risk of exposing tissues to RNase(s). The thickness of whole mount specimens, however, often prevents accurate determination of sites of expression within specific tissues. Although post-hybridization embedding and sectioning is a solution to this problem, the precipitate formed following the common colorimetric detection procedure is soluble in the organic solvents used for dehydration prior to embedding. We have developed a dehydration and embedding procedure that takes advantage of the compatibility of L.R. White resin containing 10% (v/v) polyethylene glycol 400, and heat polymerized. The addition of the plasticizer allows L.R. White embedded tissues to be sectioned at 10 microm providing excellent signal contrast.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.006

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnic & HistochemistrySame topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207