MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126472136 · doi:10.1242/dmm.015263

Histopathology reveals correlative and unique phenotypes in a high throughput mouse phenotyping screen

2014· article· en· W2126472136 on OpenAlexaff
Hibret A. Adissu, Jeanne Estabel, David Sunter, Elizabeth Tuck, Yvette Hooks, Damian M. Carragher, Kay Clarke, Natasha A. Karp, Susan Newbigging, Nora Jones, Lily Morikawa, Jacqui White, Colin McKerlie

Bibliographic record

VenueDisease Models & Mechanisms · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Centre for Phenogenomics
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Institutes of HealthWellcome Trust
KeywordsHistopathologyBiologyPhenotypeSanger sequencingConcordancePathologyGeneticsGeneMutationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Mouse Genetics Project (MGP) at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute aims to generate and phenotype over 800 genetically modified mouse lines over the next 5 years to gain a better understanding of mammalian gene function and provide an invaluable resource to the scientific community for follow-up studies. Phenotyping includes the generation of a standardized biobank of paraffin-embedded tissues for each mouse line, but histopathology is not routinely performed. In collaboration with the Pathology Core of the Centre for Modeling Human Disease (CMHD) we report the utility of histopathology in a high-throughput primary phenotyping screen. Histopathology was assessed in an unbiased selection of 50 mouse lines with (n=30) or without (n=20) clinical phenotypes detected by the standard MGP primary phenotyping screen. Our findings revealed that histopathology added correlating morphological data in 19 of 30 lines (63.3%) in which the primary screen detected a phenotype. In addition, seven of the 50 lines (14%) presented significant histopathology findings that were not associated with or predicted by the standard primary screen. Three of these seven lines had no clinical phenotype detected by the standard primary screen. Incidental and strain-associated background lesions were present in all mutant lines with good concordance to wild-type controls. These findings demonstrate the complementary and unique contribution of histopathology to high-throughput primary phenotyping of mutant mice.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations47
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisease Models & MechanismsSame topicMolecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207