Tissue-Specific Cross-Reactivity of Connexin32 Antibodies: Problems and Solutions Unique to the Central Nervous System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gap junction proteins are a highly homologous family of 21 connexins. Here, the authors describe a tissue-specific technical artifact complicating analysis of connexin32 protein expression in the central nervous system. The authors show that in brain, but not liver, eight commonly employed antibodies exhibit a higher affinity for a cross-reactive protein that masks the detection of connexin32. Cross-reactivity is evident in Western blot analyses when proteins are subjected to reducing/denaturing conditions but not immunoprecipitation or immunofluorescent applications. Through bioinformatic analyses, tested by sucrose gradient fractionation and immunoblotting of lysates from connexin null-mutant mice, the authors show that the cross-reactive protein is not found in the same cellular compartments as connexin32 and is likely not a member of the connexin family. These findings are presented with the intent of helping to reduce the amount of time laboratories currently expend in validating changes in connexin32 expression in the central nervous system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".