MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618948284 · doi:10.4081/xeno.2017.6702

Dose-response relationships in gene expression profiles in a harbor seal B lymphoma cell line exposed to 17α-ethinyl estradiol

2017· article· en· W2618948284 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Kleinert, Matthieu Blanchet, François Gagné, Michel Fournier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Xenobiotics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Canadian institutionsCégep de Saint-LaurentEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaArmand Frappier Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGene expressionPhocaToxicantBiologyGeneHarbor sealLymphomaComplementary DNAXenobioticEndocrinologyInternal medicineMolecular biologyMedicineImmunologyToxicityGeneticsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The determination of changes in gene expression profiles with xenobiotic dose will allow identifying biomarkers and modes of toxicant action. The harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) 11B7501 B lymphoma cell line was exposed to 1, 10, 100, 1000, 10,000, or 25,000 μg/L 17α-ethinyl estradiol (EE2, the active compound of the contraceptive pill) for 24 h. Following exposure, RNA was extracted and transformed into cDNA. Transcript expression in exposed vs. control lymphocytes was analyzed via RT-qPCR to identify genes with altered expression. Our analysis indicates that gene expression for all but the reference gene varied with dose, suggesting that different doses induce distinct physiological responses. These findings demonstrate that RT-qPCR could be used to identify immunotoxicity and relative dose in harbor seal leukocytes.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of XenobioticsSame topicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental ImpactsFrench-language works237,207