MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315738888 · doi:10.5099/aj120100001

Evaluation of the Ability of Short and Long Double-stranded RNAs to Induce Homologous Gene Silencing in the Protozoan Parasite, Toxoplasma gondii

2012· article· en· W2315738888 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna K. Crater, Ahmed Cherry, Michael J. Holmes, Dema Kadri, Sirinart Ananvoranich

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Biomedical Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicToxoplasma gondii Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Colleges and Universities
KeywordsToxoplasma gondiiProtozoan parasiteParasite hostingGene silencingHomologous chromosomeVirologyBiologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among recently developed genetic tools, RNA interference (RNAi) is one of the most effective methods used in eukaryotes.Although an RNAi-like mechanism can be invoked in Toxoplasma gondii, a highly effective RNAi methodology is still elusive.Using a dual luciferase system, the ability of short (28 nucleotides) and long dsRNA (~600 nucleotides) as RNA effectors controlling gene expression in T. gondii was evaluated.An effective down regulation can be observed when ≤ 1 microgram of short dsRNAs were used in the down regulation of Renilla luciferase.We have detected that short dsRNAs are better gene modulators than long dsRNA.Most importantly, due to its high sensitivity and reproducibility, the dual luciferase reporter system reported here offers an excellent tool to be used in (i) the standardization of the RNAi silencing methodology performed in different Toxoplasma laboratories, (ii) the detailed mechanistic study of the RNAi pathway, and (iii) the development of better genetic tools for the biological study of protozoan parasites.

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)0.001
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.309 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Biomedical SciencesSame topicToxoplasma gondii Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207