Effects of formaldehyde fixation on equine platelets using flow cytometric methods to evaluate markers of platelet activation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of formaldehyde fixation on equine platelets using flow cytometric methods to evaluate markers of platelet activation. SAMPLE POPULATION: Blood samples from 6 Thoroughbreds. PROCEDURE: The degree of fluorescence associated with binding of fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-conjugated anti-human fibrinogen antibody and FITC-annexin V in unactivated and adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-, platelet activating factor (PAF)-, and A23187-activated platelet samples in unfixed and 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0% formaldehyde-fixed samples was assessed by use of flow cytometry. RESULTS: In samples incubated with FITC-anti-human fibrinogen antibody prior to fixation, addition of 2.0% formaldehyde resulted in a 30% increase in total fluorescence in ADP- and PAF-activated samples and a 60% increase in A23187-activated samples. Fixation for 24 hours prior to addition of antibody resulted in reduced fluorescence of samples containing antihuman fibrinogen antibody for all 3 concentrations of formaldehyde in PAF-activated samples. The addition of all 3 concentrations of formaldehyde after incubation with FITC-annexin V resulted in significant increases in fluorescence in unactivated and activated platelet samples. As length of fixation time increased, there was a gradual increase in fluorescence that was significant at 24 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Because fixation with 2.0% formaldehyde results in significant changes in fluorescence in activated platelet samples containing anti-fibrinogen antibody, lower concentrations of formaldehyde should be used to fix equine platelet samples. Formaldehyde-fixed platelet samples should be analyzed within 12 hours of fixation to avoid artifactual increases in fluorescence. Fixation of samples containing FITC-annexin V should be avoided because of significant increases in fluorescence that may interfere with interpretation of results.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".