Mitogen Stimulation of Rabbit Spleen Cells before and after Complement-Mediated Cell Kill with an Antiserum Directed against the Thymus Antigen RTLA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rabbit thymus lymphocyte antigen (RTLA) has been previously characterized as an antigen of rabbit thymus-derived cells (Cell. Immunol. 7: 484–501, 1973). It has now been shown that the antigen may be regarded as a thymus marker in terms of cellular responsiveness to various mitogens. It was found that only RTLA-bearing spleen cells responded to phytohaemagglutinin and concanavalin A with increased thymidine uptake. Only those spleen cells, which remained viable after treatment with RTLA antibody and complement, responded by thymidine incorporation to antibody against A4 light chain marker. The sensitivity of the detection of mitogen effects was improved by removing cells, adhering to or ingesting magnetic core particles, coated with poly-L-lysine. Following such pretreatment, there was a reduction in thymidine uptake by unstimulated spleen cells. This reduction in background thymidine incorporation made it possible to determine target specificity with mitogens of low potency. Using this technique, it became possible to demonstrate that lipopolysaccharide is a mitogen for rabbit B cells, albeit marginally so, and much less effective for rabbit than for murine B cells.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".