MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073691549 · doi:10.1016/j.mex.2014.04.001

Three dimensional dual labelled DNA fluorescent in situ hybridization analysis in fixed tissue sections

2014· article· en· W2073691549 on OpenAlexafffund
Kristin D. Kernohan, Nathalie G. Bérubé

Bibliographic record

VenueMethodsX · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteWestern UniversityLawson Health Research Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIn situ hybridizationIn situChromatinDNAFluorescenceBiologyFluorescence in situ hybridizationFish <Actinopterygii>Computational biologyCell biologyMolecular biologyBiophysicsChemistryBiochemistryChromosomeGeneMessenger RNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emerging studies demonstrate that three-dimensional organization of chromatin in the nucleus plays a vital role in regulating the genome. DNA fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) is a common molecular technique used to visualize the location of DNA sequences. The vast majority of DNA FISH studies are conducted on cultured cells due to the technical difficulties encountered using fixed tissue sections. However, the use of cultured cells poses important limitations that could yield misleading results, making in vivo analysis a far superior approach. Here we present a protocol for multiplexed three dimensional DNA FISH in mouse brain sections, which is also applicable to other tissues. Paraffin-embedded tissues could be used but the embedding and preparation of the samples is time-consuming and often associated with poor antigenicity. To overcome this problem we:•developed a FISH technique using fixed, frozen cryosections;•provide specific instructions for tissue processing for proper fixation and freezing, including equilibration in sucrose gradients to maintain proper cellular structure;•include optimized permeabilization and washing steps to achieve specific signal and to limit background fluorescence in tissue sections.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethodsXSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207