A Reagent-Free Screening Assay for Evaluation of the Effects of Chemicals on the Proliferation and Morphology of HeLa-GFP Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A reagent-free screening assay using HeLa cells with green fluorescent protein expressed in the cytoplasm was developed to describe adherence and proliferation of cells after seeding and to evaluate the dose- and time-dependent effects of three classes of chemicals, including metals (CdCl 2, MeHg, HgCl 2, and NiCl 2 ), flame retardants [tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate, heptadecafluoro-1-octanesulfonic acid, tetrabromobisphenol A, and tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate], and phenolic fungicides (2,4,6-trichlorophenol, 4- tert -butylphenol, 3-bromophenol, and 2,4-dibromophenol), on the proliferation and morphology of cells. A seeding density of 5000 cells/well was determined to be optimal, and the most suitable duration of xenobiotic exposure was 120 h beginning 58 h postseeding. Dose- and time-dependent alterations in total fluorescence in the fluorescent field and number of cells, area per cell, and cellular roundness in the bright field were identified after exposure to each of the target chemicals. Results were comparable to those of the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay or other end points published in the literature for the same chemicals.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".