MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092299495 · doi:10.4021/gr310e

Electron Microscopic Radioautographic Study on the Protein Synthesis in the Pancreas of Aging Mice With Special Reference to Mitochondria

2011· article· en· W2092299495 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nagata

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDigestive system and related health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganelleMitochondrionCellPancreasCell biologyElectron microscopeChemistryBiologyEndocrinologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate the aging changes of macromolecular synthesis in animal cells. METHODS: H-leucine, a precursor for protein synthesis, sacrificed and the pancreatic tissues were taken out, fixed and processed for light and electron microscopic radioautography. On many radioautograms the localization of silver grains demonstrating protein synthesis in pancreatic acinar cells in respective aging groups were first analyzed qualitatively. Then the number of silver grains and the number of cell organelles in each cell in respective aging groups were analyzed quantitatively in relation to the aging of animals. The number of mitochondria, the number of labeled mitochondria and the mitochondrial labeling index labeled with silver grains were counted in each pancreatic acinar cell. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The number of silver grains in cell nuclei and cell organelles changed with the aging of animals. The number of mitochondria, the number of labeled mitochondria and the labeling indices showing protein synthesis at various ages increased from embryonic day 19 to postnatal newborn day 1, 3, 7, 14, to young adult month 1, and 2, reaching the maxima, then decreased at old adult month 6 and senile year 1 to 2, indicating the aging changes.

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 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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastroenterology ResearchSame topicDigestive system and related healthFrench-language works237,207