MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126742522 · doi:10.3109/10520290009066500

Recovery and Enhancement of Faded Cleared and Double Stained Specimens

2000· article· en· W2126742522 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnic & Histochemistry · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClearanceStainingALIZARIN REDStainDifferential stainingHydrogen peroxideChemistryPreservativeAnatomyPathologyBiologyMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cleared and stained specimens may become faded and/or opaque after long periods in preservative solutions. We developed a technique to revitalize faded and/or destained specimens regardless of their age. By adapting and revising Wassersug's procedure for differential staining of bone and cartilage, we successfully cleared and restained numerous small amphibian specimens of various ages. After rehydrating, specimens were bleached in potassium hydroxide and hydrogen peroxide, stained with alcian blue, and macerated with trypsin as needed. Alizarin red stain was applied or reapplied, although staining occasionally was unsuccessful in old formalin fixed specimens. After restaining, the specimens were dehydrated and placed in glycerol.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.226 · 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