MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031077285 · doi:10.1101/pdb.prot5487

Electrophysiological Recording from <i>Drosophila</i> Larval Body-Wall Muscles

2010· article· en· W2031077285 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bing Zhang, Bryan A. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueCold Spring Harbor Protocols · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsOklahoma Center for the Advancement of Science and Technology
KeywordsLarvaElectrophysiologyDrosophila (subgenus)AnatomyBiologyZoologyNeuroscienceEcologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Drosophila larval neuromuscular junction (NMJ) shares many structural and functional similarities to synapses in other animals, including humans. These include the basic feature of synaptic transmission, as well as the molecular mechanisms regulating the synaptic vesicle cycle. Because of its large size, easy accessibility, and the well-characterized genetics, the fly NMJ remains an excellent model system for dissecting the cellular and molecular mechanisms of synaptic transmission. This protocol describes the steps for performing intracellular recording from fly larval body-wall muscles and explains how to record and analyze spontaneous and evoked synaptic potentials. Methods used include larval dissection ("filleting"), identification of muscle fibers and their innervating nerves, the use of a micromanipulator and microelectrode in penetrating the muscle membrane, and nerve stimulation to evoke synaptic potentials.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.302
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 designNot applicable
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

Citations37
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCold Spring Harbor ProtocolsSame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207