MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009726695 · doi:10.1101/pdb.prot080218

Visualizing Apoptosis in Embryos and the Germline of <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>

2014· article· en· W2009726695 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCold Spring Harbor Protocols · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaenorhabditis elegansGermlineApoptosisProgrammed cell deathCell biologyBiologyEmbryoModel organismSomatic cellCell divisionCellGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visualizing apoptosis in developing embryos or the germline of Caenorhabditis elegans is remarkably easy because of the transparency of the organism. The invariant pattern of cell division and programmed cell death during development makes it possible to quantify small but reproducible changes in apoptosis, which are easy to detect by light microscopy because of the refractile properties of dying cells. Although apoptotic death is easy to visualize and quantify in the germline of adult hermaphrodites, the pattern of cell death is variable, especially when triggered by stress. The most convenient method for visualization of apoptosis in vivo is light microscopy, which requires immobilizing live embryos or adult animals on slides. This protocol describes the basic methods for visualizing and analyzing apoptosis in living animals.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.241 · 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