MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130611413 · doi:10.4081/1218

Immunocytochemistry of matrix proteins in calcified tissues: functional biochemistry on section

2009· review· en· W2130611413 on OpenAlexafffund
Antonio Nanci, Rima Wazen, Clarice Nishio, SF Zalzal

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Histochemistry · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone and Dental Protein Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsImmunocytochemistrySection (typography)Bone matrixPathologyMatrix (chemical analysis)BiochemistryChemistryCell biologyAnatomyBiologyMedicineComputer scienceChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The organic matrix of calcified tissues comprises collagenous and/or noncollagenous matrix proteins (NCPs). Identification and precise mapping of these matrix components is essential for determining their function, formulating coherent hypotheses on their mechanism(s) of action, and developing novel therapeutic approaches based on biologics. Fibrillar collagen can be readily identified by its conspicuous structure, however, NCPs, in general, do not individually exhibit characteristic structural features that permit to identify them and morphologically determine their localization. To address this limitation, we have used immunocytochemistry, a form of "biochemistry on section", to correlate composition with structure. For cytochemical characterizations, including immunolabeling, our laboratory has opted for colloidal gold labelings and pioneered their application to calcified tissues because they yield high spatial resolution and are quantitative. Over the years, this approach has been applied to identify and map various NCPs in bone and teeth and, in this review of our work, we will emphasize some selected studies that highlight it application to also achieve functional information.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of HistochemistrySame topicBone and Dental Protein StudiesFrench-language works237,207