MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007015982 · doi:10.1155/2012/820120

Characterization and Quenching of Autofluorescence in Piglet Testis Tissue and Cells

2012· article· en· W2007015982 on OpenAlexafffund
Yanfei Yang, Ali Honaramooz

Bibliographic record

VenueAnatomy Research International · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicViral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in Insects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsAutofluorescenceMedicinePathologyFluorescence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significant intrinsic fluorescence in tissues and in disassociated cells can interfere with fluorescence identification of target cells. The objectives of the present study were (1) to examine an intrinsic fluorescence we observed in both the piglet testis tissue and cells and (2) to test an effective method to block the autofluorescence. We observed that a number of granules within the testis interstitial cells were inherently fluorescent, detectable using epifluorescence microscopy, confocal laser scanning microscopy, and flow cytometry. The emission wavelength of the autofluorescent substance ranged from 425 to 700 nm, a range sufficiently broad that could potentially interfere with fluorescence techniques. When we treated the samples with Sudan Black B for different incubation times, the intrinsic fluorescence was completely masked after treatment for 10-15 min of the testis tissue sections or for 8 min of the testis cells, without compromising specific fluorescence labeling of gonocytes with lectin Dolichos biflorus agglutinin (DBA). We speculate that the lipofuscin or lipofuscin-like pigments within Leydig cell granules were mainly responsible for the observed intrinsic fluorescence in piglet testes. The method described in the present study can facilitate the identification and characterization of piglet gonocytes using fluorescence microscopy.

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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnatomy Research InternationalSame topicViral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in InsectsFrench-language works237,207