MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2417713113 · doi:10.1007/978-1-61779-005-8_2

FISH and Immunofluorescence Staining in Chlamydomonas

2011· article· en· W2417713113 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMicro and Nano Robotics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChlamydomonas reinhardtiiChlamydomonasStainingImmunofluorescenceBiologyIn situFish <Actinopterygii>Model organismCell biologyFluorescenceIn situ hybridizationFluorescence in situ hybridizationGeneGeneticsGene expressionChemistryAntibodyFisheryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here we describe how to use fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunofluorescence staining to determine the in situ distributions of specific mRNAs and proteins in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. This unicellular eukaryotic green alga is a major model organism in cell biological research. Chlamydomonas is well suited for these approaches because one can determine the cytological location of fluorescence signals within a characteristic cellular anatomy relative to prominent cytological markers. Moreover, FISH and IF staining offer practical alternatives to techniques involving fluorescent proteins, which are difficult to express and detect in Chlamydomonas. The main goal of this review is to describe these powerful tools and to facilitate their routine use in Chlamydomonas research.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.328 · 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