MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2285476940

Quantification of chick lens alphaA- and delta-crystallins in experimentally induced ametropia.

2002· article· en· W2285476940 on OpenAlexaff
Sophia Zaidi, Michelle Senchyna, J. G. Sivak

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicConnexins and lens biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetinoscopyDioptreVitreous chamberLens (geology)Refractive errorEmmetropiaOphthalmologyCrystallinChromatic aberrationOptometryChemistryBiologyOpticsEye diseaseMedicineVisual acuityGeneticsPhysicsChromatic scale
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The role of the lens in experimentally induced ametropia is not known. A recent study of the chick lens demonstrated optical quality deterioration with the induction of refractive errors, without alteration in lens morphology, size or shape. A change in lens gradient of refractive index (which is dependent on alpha-, beta-, and delta-crystallin concentration and arrangement), could underlie this observation. The purpose of this work was to quantify the concentrations of alphaA- and delta-crystallin in lenses from chick eyes with induced high myopia or hyperopia. METHODS: White Leghorn chicks were unilaterally fitted on the day of hatching either with translucent plastic goggles to induce form-deprivation myopia (n=21) or with +15 D defocus goggles to induce hyperopia (n=14). The ungoggled contralateral eyes were used as controls. The chicks were refracted twice, once on the day of hatching and again seven days later, using streak retinoscopy. On day 7 chicks were sacrificed, lenses decapsulated, and soluble proteins were isolated. Western blot assays were optimized and used to assess crystallin concentration. RESULTS: Analysis revealed no significant difference in alphaA- or delta-crystallin concentration in lenses from eyes induced with form-deprivation myopia and hyperopia as compared to their respective control eyes. Analysis of the difference in medians of delta-crystallin between the control and treated groups of the myopia and hyperopia experiments revealed significance (p=0.030). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that with the induction of ametropia, the increased lens spherical aberration previously noted is not due to a change in the absolute concentration of lens alphaA- or delta-crystallin. However, results suggest that the myopic and hyperopic treatments had different effects on lens delta-crystallin concentration. Further investigation is necessary to expand the current knowledge of the role played by the lens in experimental ametropia.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicConnexins and lens biologyFrench-language works237,207