Cross‐contamination of the human salivary gland <scp>HSG</scp> cell line with HeLa cells: A <scp>STR</scp> analysis study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The human salivary gland (HSG) cell line, labeled as a submandibular ductal cell line, is commonly used as in vitro models to study radiation therapy, Sjögren's syndrome, pleomorphic adenoma, mucocele, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, and epigenetics. However, the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) has recently released a list of cross-contaminated cell lines that included HSG. Despite this notice, some research laboratories still use HSG as a salivary cell model. Therefore, this study examined the authenticity of HSG sampled from three different laboratories. METHODS: DNA was extracted from HSG and additional salivary cell lines (NS-SV-AC, NS-SV-DC, A253, HSY) and submitted for cell line authentication with short tandem repeat (STR) analysis. RESULTS: All HSG samples had STR profiles indicating >80% match with HeLa in both the ATCC and Deutsche Sammlung von Mikroorganismen und Zellkulturen (DSMZ) databases. This confirmed that HSG sampled from three different laboratories and HSY shared a common ancestry (host) with HeLa, whereas NS-SV-AC, NS-SV-DC, and A253 had unique STR profiles. CONCLUSION: Short tandem repeat analysis revealed that HSG was contaminated by the HeLa cell line. Furthermore, because genotyping of the original HSG cell line was not performed during its establishment, it will be difficult to authenticate an uncontaminated sample of HSG.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it