MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Thermal expansion of substrate may affect adhesion of Chinese hamster fibroblasts to surfaces during freezing

2018· article· en· W2895840551 on OpenAlexafffund
Taylor Rutt, Nasim Eskandari, Maria Zhurova, Janet A.W. Elliott, Locksley E. McGann, Jason P. Acker, John A. Nychka

Bibliographic record

VenueCryobiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChinese hamsterAdhesionSubstrate (aquarium)HamsterAffect (linguistics)BiophysicsChemistryCell biologyBiologyBiochemistryMolecular biologyIn vitroPsychologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite success in cryopreservation of cells in suspension, cryopreservation of cells in monolayers is still challenging. One of the major problems is detachment of the cells from the substrate which occurs during cryopreservation. We hypothesized that this detachment may be due to a mismatch in the coefficient of linear thermal expansion α L between glass and the frozen cell layer which manifests as residual stress and stress relaxation. This mismatch results in a difference between the thermal expansion of ice and glass as they undergo temperature changes. Rinzl plastic coverslips were selected as a possible substitute for glass because Rinzl has an α L (60 × 10 −6 /K) similar to that of ice (51 × 10 −6 /K) whereas glass has a much lower α L (5 × 10 −6 /K). V79-4 Chinese hamster fibroblasts were cultured on both glass and Rinzl coverslips until confluent and the area of coverage was measured before and after freezing at −9 °C. The glass coverslips showed significant loss of cells (coverage = 77.9 ± 8.0%) compared with Rinzl (coverage = 97.9 ± 1.4%). We concluded that Rinzl coverslips may improve cell attachment in future monolayer cryopreservation experiments.

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 score0.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCryobiologySame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207