MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049144531 · doi:10.1002/elps.200500921

A simple protocol for protein extraction of recalcitrant fruit tissues suitable for 2‐DE and MS analysis

2006· article· en· W2049144531 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueElectrophoresis · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromatographyExtraction (chemistry)Phenol extractionFleshProtein purificationAcetoneChemistrySpotsBiologyBiochemistryBotanyFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fruit tissues are considered recalcitrant plant tissue for proteomic analysis. Three phenol-free protein extraction procedures for 2-DE were compared and evaluated on apple fruit proteins. Incorporation of hot SDS buffer, extraction with TCA/acetone precipitation was found to be the most effective protocol. The results from SDS-PAGE and 2-DE analysis showed high quality proteins. More than 500 apple polypeptides were separated on a small scale 2-DE gel. The successful protocol was further tested on banana fruit, in which 504 and 386 proteins were detected in peel and flesh tissues, respectively. To demonstrate the quality of the extracted proteins, several protein spots from apple and banana peels were cut from 2-DE gels, analyzed by MS and have been tentatively identified. The protocol described in this study is a simple procedure which could be routinely used in proteomic studies of many types of recalcitrant fruit tissues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.313 · 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