MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2745842974 · doi:10.18474/jes17-02pt.1

A Review of Insect Cell Culture: Establishment, Maintenance and Applications in Entomological Research

2017· review· en· W2745842974 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Entomological Science · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicViral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in Insects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIndian Agricultural Research InstituteResearch Nova ScotiaIndian Council of Agricultural Research
KeywordsBiologyBiotechnologyInsectGenetically engineeredComputational biologyEcologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A great number of cell lines from hemipteran, lepidopteran, and dipteran insects have been developed and characterized. Using the advent of new techniques and instruments in molecular biology as well as the advancement in biotechnology, the indigenous cell lines might prove useful in the development of alternatives to conventional chemical pesticides for agriculture and in the creation of vaccines and life-saving pharmaceuticals for human and animal diseases. Cell cultures of insects are used for the generation of vaccines, viral pesticides, and recombinant proteins, and in basic research in virology, endocrinology, molecular biology, genetics, and biochemistry. This paper summarizes information collected regarding the different insect cell lines developed and characterized thus far and also describes different applications in entomological 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.313 · 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