MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019760779 · doi:10.1021/bp070173t

A Study of the Interaction of HEK-293 Cells with Streamline Chelating Adsorbent in Expanded Bed Operation

2008· article· en· W2019760779 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Poulin, Renaud Jacquemart, Gregory DeCrescenzo, Robert Legros

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology Progress · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein purification and stability
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdsorptionChromatographyChemistryHEK 293 cellsCentrifugationExpanded bed adsorptionChelationFiltration (mathematics)Chemical engineeringBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expanded bed adsorption (EBA) is an efficient protein purification process reducing time and steps of downstream processing (DSP) since nonclarified culture media can be processed directly without prior treatments such as filtration or centrifugation. However, cells and debris can interact with the adsorbent and affect bed stability as well as purification performance. To optimize EBA operating conditions these biomass/adsorbent interactions have to be understood and characterized. The adsorption of Human Embryonic Kidney cells (HEK 293) on unprimed and nickel-primed metal affinity adsorbent was studied in a closed loop EBA setup. With the unprimed adsorbent, the overall level of interaction observed was nonsignificant. With the nickel-primed adsorbent and an initial cell concentration ranging from 0.08 x 10(6) to 0.2 x 10(6) cells/mL, biomass/adsorbent interaction was found to be moderate and the adsorption apparent first-order kinetic rate constant was determined to be k = 0.009 to 0.011 min(-1).

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology ProgressSame topicProtein purification and stabilityFrench-language works237,207