Antifreeze Protein Prolongs the Life-Time of Insulinoma Cells during Hypothermic Preservation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is sometimes desirable to preserve mammalian cells by hypothermia rather than freezing during short term transplantation. Here we found an ability of hypothermic (+4°C) preservation of fish antifreeze protein (AFP) against rat insulinoma cells denoted as RIN-5F. The preservation ability was compared between type I-III AFPs and antifreeze glycoprotein (AFGP), which could be recently mass-prepared by a developed technique utilizing the muscle homogenates, but not the blood serum, of cold-adapted fishes. For AFGP, whose molecular weight is distributed in the range from 2.6 to 34 kDa, only the proteins less than 10 kDa were examined. The viability rate was evaluated by counting of the preserved RIN-5F cells unstained with trypan blue. Significantly, either AFPI or AFPIII dissolved into Euro-Collins (EC) solution at a concentration of 10 mg/ml could preserve approximately 60% of the cells for 5 days at +4°C. The 5-day preserved RIN-5F cells retained the ability to secrete insulin. Only 2% of the cells were, however, preserved for 5 days without AFP. Confocal photomicroscopy experiments further showed the significant binding ability of AFP to the cell surface. These results suggest that fish AFP enables 5-day quality storage of the insulinoma cells collected from a donor without freezing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".