MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766966419 · doi:10.1038/s41467-017-01291-z

A method for measuring the distribution of the shortest telomeres in cells and tissues

2017· article· en· W2766966419 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tsung‐Po Lai, Ning Zhang, Jungsik Noh, İlgen Mender, Enzo Tedone, Ejun Huang, Woodring E. Wright, Gaudenz Danuser, Jerry W. Shay

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Marine Sanctuary FoundationNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on AgingUniversité de MontréalCancer Prevention and Research Institute of TexasMayo Clinic
KeywordsTelomereChromosomeBiologyPeripheral blood mononuclear cellDNAPeripheral bloodComputational biologyGeneticsGeneImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improved methods to measure the shortest (not just average) telomere lengths (TLs) are needed. We developed Telomere Shortest Length Assay (TeSLA), a technique that detects telomeres from all chromosome ends from <1 kb to 18 kb using small amounts of input DNA. TeSLA improves the specificity and efficiency of TL measurements that is facilitated by user friendly image-processing software to automatically detect and annotate band sizes, calculate average TL, as well as the percent of the shortest telomeres. Compared with other TL measurement methods, TeSLA provides more information about the shortest telomeres. The length of telomeres was measured longitudinally in peripheral blood mononuclear cells during human aging, in tissues during colon cancer progression, in telomere-related diseases such as idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, as well as in mice and other organisms. The results indicate that TeSLA is a robust method that provides a better understanding of the shortest length of telomeres.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations167
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicTelomeres, Telomerase, and SenescenceFrench-language works237,207