MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of rapid volume changes of substrate‐adherent cells by conventional microscopy 3D imaging

2004· article· en· W2024141104 on OpenAlexafffund
F. Boudreault, Ryszard Grygorczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Microscopy · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôtel-Dieu de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitut de Cardiologie de MontréalCystic Fibrosis CanadaCystic Fibrosis Foundation
KeywordsVolume (thermodynamics)MicroscopyBiomedical engineeringPhase contrast microscopyConfocal microscopySubstrate (aquarium)Materials scienceConfocalOptical microscopeMicroscopeOpticsScanning electron microscopePathologyCell biologyBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precise measurement of rapid volume changes of substrate-adherent cells is essential to understand many aspects of cell physiology, yet techniques to evaluate volume changes with sufficient precision and high temporal resolution are limited. Here, we describe a novel imaging method that surveys the rapid morphology modifications of living, substrate-adherent cells based on phase-contrast, digital video microscopy. Cells grown on a glass substrate are mounted in a custom-designed, side-viewing chamber and subjected to hypotonic swelling. Side-view images of the rapidly swelling cell, and at the end of the assay, an image of the same cell viewed from a perpendicular direction through the substrate, are acquired. Based on these images, off-line reconstruction of 3D cell morphology is performed, which precisely measures cell volume, height and surface at different points during cell volume changes. Volume evaluations are comparable to those obtained by confocal laser scanning microscopy (DeltaVolume < or = 14%), but our method has superior temporal resolution limited only by the time of single-image acquisition, typically approximately 100 ms. The advantages of using standard phase-contrast microscopy without the need for cell staining or intense illumination to monitor cell volume make this system a promising new tool to investigate the fundamentals of cell volume physiology.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.291 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations46
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MicroscopySame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207