RNA Preservation in Decalcified Cochlear Samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HYPOTHESIS: Decalcification of cochlear samples in Morse's solution after methacarn fixation provides greater RNA quantification and morphologic preservation of cochlear structures as compared with EDTA and formic acid decalcifying solutions after methacarn fixation. BACKGROUND: A variety of fixatives and decalcifying agents can fragment or chemically alter RNA in samples inhibiting their isolation and quantification. Morphologic alterations can also be observed in light microscopy analyses. The cochlea is embedded in the bone; hence, fixation and decalcification steps are mandatory to obtain histologic sections and preserve the cochlea for morphologic evaluation. METHODS: Cochlear samples obtained in a RNase-free environment were processed in 4 combinations of decalcifying agents in combination with methacarn fixation. Samples in Protocols 1, 2, and 3 were fixed in methacarn for 4 hours at 4°C, followed by decalcification at 4°C with Morse's solution, 10% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, and 5% formic acid solution, respectively. Samples processed with protocol 4 were decalcified in Morse's solution at 4°C followed by fixation for 4 hours at 4°C. Real-time PCR analysis was performed on total RNA extracted. Histology sections were evaluated for morphology preservation of cochlear structures. RESULTS: RNA was isolated in all samples. Relative expression levels were greatest with Protocol 1 and lowest with Protocol 3. Morphology preservation was adequate with Protocols 1, 2, and 3. CONCLUSION: Of the 4 protocols evaluated, methacarn fixation followed by decalcification in Morse's solution provided the greatest genetic expression levels as well as the best tissue morphology preservation in the cochlea.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".