New Tools for Investigating the Comparative Biology of <i>Caenorhabditis</i> <i>briggsae</i> and <i>C. elegans</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comparative studies of Caenorhabditis briggsae and C. elegans have provided insights into gene function and developmental control in both organisms. C. elegans is a well developed model organism with a variety of molecular and genetic tools to study gene functions. In contrast, there are only very limited tools available for its closest relative, C. briggsae. To take advantage of the full potential of this comparative approach, we have developed several genetic and molecular tools to facilitate functional analysis in C. briggsae. First, we designed and implemented an SNP-based oligonucleotide microarray for rapid mapping of genetic mutants in C. briggsae. Second, we generated a mutagenized frozen library to permit the isolation of targeted deletions and used the library to recover a deletion mutant of cbr-unc-119 for use as a transgenic marker. Third, we used the cbr-unc-119 mutant in ballistic transformation and generated fluorescently labeled strains that allow automated lineaging and cellular resolution expression analysis. Finally, we demonstrated the potential of automated lineaging by profiling expression of egl-5, hlh-1, and pha-4 at cellular resolution and by detailed phenotyping of the perturbations on the Wnt signaling pathway. These additions to the experimental toolkit for C. briggsae should greatly increase its utility in comparative studies with C. elegans. With the emerging sequence of nematode species more closely related to C. briggsae, these tools may open novel avenues of experimentation in C. briggsae itself.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
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".