MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025883658 · doi:10.1159/000136610

Action of Δ <sup>9</sup> -Tetrahydrocannabinol on Cell Division and Macromolecular Synthesis in Division-Synchronized Protozoa

2008· article· en· W2025883658 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel McClean, Arthur M. Zimmerman

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPolyamine Metabolism and Applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Zoo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCell divisionBiologyRNABiochemistryRibosomal RNATetrahymenaDNA synthesisDNANucleic acidCell growthCell biologyMolecular biologyCellGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delta 9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) elicited a dose-dependent (3.2-24 muM) response for form/movement, cellular growth and division in log growth phase and division-synchronized Tetrahymena pyriformis GL. Progressive dose-dependent action of THC on division delays in division-synchronized cell cultures was correlated with a concomitant reduction of division maxima and the percent of cells that completed division I. THC depressed the incorporation of 5-3H-uridine, 2-14C-thymidine and L-3-14C-phenylalanine into RNA, DNA and protein macromolecules respectively of division-synchronized Tetrahymena during division I. The depression of incorporation of 5-3H-uridine into nucleic acid macromolecules was correlated with a reduction of exogenous precursor in the cellular pool. The specific activity of radiolabeled mRNA and nascent polypeptides of polyribosomal fractions from synchronized cells was reduced by THC treatment. THC caused an inhibition of the incorporation of 5-3H-uridine into ribosomal RNA (17S and 25S RNA) and ribosomal precursor RNA (35S RNA) of synchronized 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 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)0.000
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations60
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacologySame topicPolyamine Metabolism and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207