Electroporation of Adherent Cells In Situ for the Study of Signal Transduction and Gap Junctional Communication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cultured adherent cells can be electroporated in situ, as they grow on a glass slide coated with electrically conductive, optically transparent indium-tin oxide (ITO). Although the introduction of DNA is a common use, the technique of electroporation in situ is valuable for studying many aspects of signal transduction. This is because, under the appropriate conditions, in situ electroporation can be remarkably nontraumatic, while a large variety of molecules, such as peptides, oligonucleotides, or drugs, are introduced instantly and into essentially 100% of the cells, making this technique especially suitable for kinetic studies of effector activation. Following the introduction of the material, the cells can be either extracted or biochemically analyzed, or their morphology and gene expression can be examined by immunocytochemistry. In this chapter, we describe the introduction of a peptide blocking the Src-homology 2 domain of the adaptor Grb2 to inhibit the activation of the downstream effector Erk1/2 by EGF. The setup includes nonelectroporated, control cells growing side by side with the electroporated ones on the same type of ITO-coated surface. In a modified version, this assembly can be used very effectively for studying intercellular, junctional communication: cells are grown on a glass slide half of which is ITO-coated. An electric pulse is applied in the presence of the fluorescent dye lucifer yellow, causing its penetration into the cells growing on the conductive part of the slide, and the migration of the dye to the nonelectroporated cells growing on the nonconductive area is microscopically observed under fluorescence illumination.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".