MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319382903 · doi:10.1139/w2012-017

Optimized expression of dual reporter genes in transient transfection of purified<i>Toxoplasma gondii</i>using different promoters

2012· article· en· W2319382903 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Yongxin Hao, Jianmin Yang, Xuelian Li, Jun Ding, Wei Zhang, Qun Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicToxoplasma gondii Research Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Food Inspection AgencyAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersChangjiang Scholar Program of Chinese Ministry of EducationUniversity of South ChinaForskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och VälfärdSouth China Agricultural UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsReporter geneGreen fluorescent proteinPromoterBiologyBioreporterTransfectionMolecular biologyLuciferaseGeneToxoplasma gondiiFluorescenceYellow fluorescent proteinGene expressionGeneticsAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluorescent protein and luciferase genes are valuable reporter genes and have been widely used for noninvasive monitoring of gene expression in living tissues and cells. We tested expression of the dual reporter genes in transient transfection of purified Toxoplasma gondii tachyzoites. Two copies of the enhanced yellow fluorescent protein (EYFP) gene were put under the control of 3 representative T. gondii promoters (GRA1, SAG1, and DHFR). Fluorescence from each EYFP reporter was significantly higher than that from a green fluorescent protein (GFP) reporter. The GRA1-EYFP reporter gave the highest fluorescence. Although both fluorescence and luciferase were expressed in the dual reporter system, the luciferase reporter was more efficient than either the EYFP or GFP reporters, and it required fewer parasites to be successfully used.

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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicToxoplasma gondii Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207