MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039562024 · doi:10.1126/science.1162395

Bioactive Contaminants Leach from Disposable Laboratory Plasticware

2008· article· en· W2039562024 on OpenAlexaff
G. Reid McDonald, Alan L. Hudson, Susan M. J. Dunn, Haitao You, Glen B. Baker, Randy M. Whittal, Jonathan W. Martin, Amitabh Jha, Dale E. Edmondson, Andrew Holt

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsAcadia UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiocideBioassayPipetteContaminationDimethyl sulfoxideCleaning agentChemistryAqueous solutionChromatographyMethanolBiochemical engineeringPulp and paper industryBiologyOrganic chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disposable plasticware such as test tubes, pipette tips, and multiwell assay or culture plates are used routinely in most biological research laboratories. Manufacturing of plastics requires the inclusion of numerous chemicals to enhance stability, durability, and performance. Some lubricating (slip) agents, exemplified by oleamide, also occur endogenously in humans and are biologically active, and cationic biocides are included to prevent bacterial colonization of the plastic surface. We demonstrate that these manufacturing agents leach from laboratory plasticware into a standard aqueous buffer, dimethyl sulfoxide, and methanol and can have profound effects on proteins and thus on results from bioassays of protein function. These findings have far-reaching implications for the use of disposable plasticware in biological research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations228
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsFrench-language works237,207