MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2274047110 · doi:10.1063/1.4941984

A microfluidic device for automated, high-speed microinjection of <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>

2016· article· en· W2274047110 on OpenAlexafffund
Pengfei Song, Xianke Dong, Xinyu Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomicrofluidics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesChina Scholarship CouncilCanada Foundation for InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsMcGill University
KeywordsMicroinjectionCaenorhabditis elegansMicrofluidicsSortingThroughputBiologyModel organismComputer scienceCell biologyNanotechnologyMaterials scienceGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nematode worm Caenorhabditis elegans has been widely used as a model organism in biological studies because of its short and prolific life cycle, relatively simple body structure, significant genetic overlap with human, and facile/inexpensive cultivation. Microinjection, as an established and versatile tool for delivering liquid substances into cellular/organismal objects, plays an important role in C. elegans research. However, the conventional manual procedure of C. elegans microinjection is labor-intensive and time-consuming and thus hinders large-scale C. elegans studies involving microinjection of a large number of C. elegans on a daily basis. In this paper, we report a novel microfluidic device that enables, for the first time, fully automated, high-speed microinjection of C. elegans. The device is automatically regulated by on-chip pneumatic valves and allows rapid loading, immobilization, injection, and downstream sorting of single C. elegans. For demonstration, we performed microinjection experiments on 200 C. elegans worms and demonstrated an average injection speed of 6.6 worm/min (average worm handling time: 9.45 s/worm) and a success rate of 77.5% (post-sorting success rate: 100%), both much higher than the performance of manual operation (speed: 1 worm/4 min and success rate: 30%). We conducted typical viability tests on the injected C. elegans and confirmed that the automated injection system does not impose significant adverse effect on the physiological condition of the injected C. elegans. We believe that the developed microfluidic device holds great potential to become a useful tool for facilitating high-throughput, large-scale worm biology research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations31
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomicrofluidicsSame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207