MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2400861197 · doi:10.1007/978-1-60327-389-3_13

Derivation, Culture, and In vivo Developmental Capacity of Embryonic Cell Lines from Rat Blastocysts

2009· article· en· W2400861197 on OpenAlexaff
Simon-Pierre Demers, Lawrence C. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsCegep de Saint HyacintheUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbryonic stem cellIn vivoCell biologyBiologyGermlineCell cultureGene targetingGeneComputational biologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embryonic stem (ES) cells have been used extensively for site-specific gene targeting in the mouse. The resulting knock-out and knock-in mouse models generated so far have demonstrated their usefulness in biomedical research. However, for many diseases and fields of study, the rat still represents a superior model. The derivation and culture of germline-competent ES cells in the rat would allow the application of site-specific gene targeting technologies to this species of indisputable importance to biomedical research. We have recently shown the derivation, culture, and for the first time, in vivo contribution of rat ES-like cells to developing tissues. This represents an important step forward in making gene targeting technologies available to the rat research community, via development of rat ES cells. Here, we describe the materials, methods and techniques that have been used to obtain rat blastocysts, derive and culture embryonic cell lines from these, and assess the developmental capacity of the cells in vivo.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biologySame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207