Gene expression analysis on sections of zebrafish regenerating fins reveals limitations in the whole‐mount in situ hybridization method
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The caudal fin of adult zebrafish is used to study the molecular mechanisms that govern regeneration processes. Most reports of gene expression in regenerating caudal fins rely on in situ hybridization (ISH) on whole-mount samples followed by sectioning of the samples. In such reports, expression is mostly confined to cells other than those located between the dense collagenous structures that are the actinotrichia and lepidotrichia. Here, we re-examined the expression of genes by performing ISH directly on cryo-sections of regenerates. We detected expression of some of these genes in cell types that appeared to be non-expressing when ISH was performed on whole-mount samples. These results demonstrate that ISH reagents have a limited capacity to penetrate between the regenerating skeletal matrices and suggest that ISH performed directly on fin sections is a preferable method to study gene expression in fin regenerates.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it