MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

High-resolution R-banding at the 1250-band level

2008· article· en· W2111935261 on OpenAlexaff
Régen Drouin, Nicole Lemieux, Claude‐Lise Richer

Bibliographic record

VenueHereditas · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGiemsa stainKaryotypeChromosomeResolution (logic)MitosisMolecular biologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-resolution human chromosomes were obtained from lymphocytes after thymidine synchronization. The block was released either with thymidine to produce GTG (G-bands by trypsin using Giemsa) and RHG (R-bands by heating using Giemsa) banding or with BrdU (5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine) for RBG (R-bands by BrdU using Giemsa) banding. RHG and RBG band patterns are only 75 to 85% congruent. The dissimilarities increase with the band number per genome and vary from one chromosome region to another. After high-resolution RBG banding, the BrdU-substituted bands show an unequal condensation delay, which can be, according to the bands involved, very important, minimal, or even absent. The bands showing the highest degree of condensation delay are the bands replicating the latest. The GTG- and RHG-band patterns show complementary matching for about 90% of the bands. It was found that two third of the chromosome surface appears positively stained after R-banding. This suggests that more DNA is replicated during early S-phase than during late S-phase. To obtain a fully developed RBG-band pattern in 90 to 95% of harvested mitoses, a period of 4.5 hours after the removal of the blocking agent is optimal. Such a brief release period also implies that late S-phase is much shorter than early S-phase.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.007

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 head0.221
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations24
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHereditasSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207