Improvement of silver impregnation technique (Protargol) to obtain morphological features of protists ciliates, flagellates and opalinates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research on ciliates, flagelates and opalinates have been widespread by the utilization of techniques employing silver impregnation (protargol), modified by several authors. However, these are time consuming and its results are variable. The present work is a variant of the technique described by Tuffrau (1964, 1967) showing some adaptations made in our laboratory. The organisms can be preserved by different fixatives (alcoholic Bouin, Stieve's fluid, 2.5% glutaraldehyde and others) and then rinsed in destilled water followed by a fast clarification by 3% sodium hypochloride. If the organism is very sensitive to hypochloride, 4% sodium lauryl sulfate may be used and then washed 3 times in distilled water. The protista can be adhered to the glass slides with Mayer's glycerinated-albumin (1 glycerin vol. to 1 or 2 albumin vol.), diluted in water at a proportion of 1:10 Cv/v., or with 1% polylysine followed by fast washes with distilled water. After the slide preparation, they were covered with a layer of 0,8% Silver proteinate. Right after that, the slide has to be placed in a glass tray lined with moist tissue and covered to prevent the proteinate to dry. The tray was placed in a incubator at 40 degrees - 50 degrees C for 30 minutes. The slides are rinsed for 1 minute. with warm (35 degrees C) distilled water. The development of the material should be done with 0.4% hydroquinone with a maximum incubation time of 1 minute. It should be developed gradually, controlling the silver impregnation intensity by observation under optical microscope. Next, rinse in distilled water for 1 minute, and then, fix in 2,5% Sodium thiosulfate. Rinse the slide for two minutes before dehydrating it in an alcoholic serial 50-100 degrees. Finally rinse the slides in xylene. Mount the slides with Entellan MerckTM or Canada balsam.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".