Quantification of Housekeeping Transcript Levels During the Development of Bovine Preimplantation Embryos1
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In mammals, the study of gene expression in the preimplantation embryo has been difficult because the standard procedures used to quantify mRNA generally require large amounts of starting material. The development of protocols using different quantitative strategies generally involving the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has provided new tools for exploration of gene expression in preimplantation embryos. However, the use of an internal standard, often referred as a housekeeping gene, is essential to normalize the mRNA levels. RNA levels of eight housekeeping genes were quantified using real time PCR throughout the preimplantation period of the bovine embryo to find the most suitable gene to be used as standard. Histone H2a was the best internal standard because the transcript levels were constant across the preimplantation period. Linear amplification of antisense RNA using the T7 promotor for in vitro transcription of the entire RNA pool was evaluated as a suitable way to preamplify the starting material prior to quantification and was effective in providing accurate RNA abundance profiles throughout the preimplantation period. However, the amplification appears to be template dependent because the amplification factors were higher for some genes.
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 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 it