MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075546633 · doi:10.1159/000232341

Nephelometric Activity as a Criterion of Adequate Antisera for Use in Immunofluorescence

2009· article· en· W2075546633 on OpenAlexaff
Jack Gauldie, Peter Horsewood, M. Koekkebaker

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Archives of Allergy and Applied Immunology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntiserumOuchterlony double immunodiffusionImmunofluorescenceSerial dilutionChemistryImmunoelectrophoresisDouble diffusionIndirect immunofluorescenceMolecular biologyAntigenBiologyImmunologyAntibodyMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have characterized monospecific sheep antisera to human IgG, IgA and IgM using Ouchterlony double diffusion, immunoelectrophoresis, quantitative precipitation and nephelometric activity. The antisera were conjugated at high and low F/P ratios, absorbed and subsequently evaluated in both direct and indirect immunofluorescence. Antisera which exhibited excellent reactivity in double diffusion, IEP and quantitative precipitation but gave a poor nephelometric response (Ab dilution greater than 1/25 gave no measurable response in the Technicon Fluoronephelometer) showed a marked decreased effectiveness in both direct and indirect fluorescence. Antisera which exhibited a strong nephelometric response were invariably excellent in double diffusion, IEP and quantitative precipitation and gave strong positive fluorescence at reasonable dilutions in both direct and indirect fluorescence. We suggest nephelometry prior to conjugation is the method of choice in screening antisera usable in immunofluorescence.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Archives of Allergy and Applied ImmunologySame topicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchFrench-language works237,207