MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991465289 · doi:10.4081/xeno.2012.e1

In vitro effects of PCDDs/Fs on NK-like cell activity of Eisenia andrei earthworms

2012· article· en· W1991465289 on OpenAlexafffund
Hayet Belmeskine, Sami Haddad, Louise Vandelac, Michel Fournier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Xenobiotics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAquaculture disease management and microbiota
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de MontréalArmand Frappier Museum
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsEisenia andreiEffectorFlow cytometryLysisK562 cellsIn vitroChemistryEC50StimulationMolecular biologyBiologyToxicityBiochemistryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we assessed<em> in vitro</em> the effects of PCDD/Fs on the NK-like cell activity in<em> Eisenia andrei</em> earthworms using flow cytometry for analysis. NK-like coelomocytes isolated from <em>E. andrei</em> and used as effectors were exposed to various concentrations of PCDDs/Fs mixture, C1 (6.25x10-3 ng 2378- TCDD/mL), C2 (12.5x10-3 ng 2378-TCDD/mL) and C3 (25x10-3 ng 2378-TCDD/mL), before adding them to human tumoral cells (K562) used as targets. We evaluated the percentage of targets lysed by Nk-like cells. The results showed a significant stimulation of the NKlike activity at C3 when PCDD/Fs were not removed from effectors before contact with targets, while no effects were noted when the effectors were washed (PCDD/Fs removed) or fixed. Assessment of the viability of the targets (K562), exposed alone and separately from effectors, to the three concentrations of PCDD/Fs, C1, C2 and C3, showed that all these concentrations were cytotoxic for K562. Results suggest that PCDD/Fs concentrations tested in this assay may be considered too low to induce suppressive effects on the immune function such as the NK-like activity in <em>E. andrei</em> earthworms.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of XenobioticsSame topicAquaculture disease management and microbiotaFrench-language works237,207