Promoter Cre‐Specific Genotyping Assays for Authentication of Cre‐Driver Mouse Lines
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
ABSTRACT The Cre‐LoxP system gene knockout (KO) technology provides cell‐ and time‐specificity of gene ablation to investigate cell‐autonomous gene function in vivo , and is paramount for understanding the function of genes involved in bone development, remodeling, and repair. This approach permits gene ablation in a cell‐ or tissue‐specific, differentiation stage‐specific, and inducible manner, thanks to the use of well‐chosen promoters that drive expression of the Cre recombinase in selected cells/tissues. The generation of these powerful tools has led to the expansion of Cre mouse lines available to the research community, which are often shared within and between laboratories. Although convenient and commonly used, genotyping these Cre lines with a generic set of primers that amplifies the Cre transgene does not distinguish between various Cre‐deleter lines. This practice poses the significant risk of mistakenly swapping Cre lineages, as laboratories often host and handle several lines at a time and utilize multiple lines per project. In line with the NIH‐led effort to promote authentication of biological reagents and increase scientific rigor, we report here strategies for designing appropriate sets of primers able to discriminate some of most widely used Cre‐deleter mouse lines in the field of bone biology, and the validation of 24 of them. © 2018 The Authors JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral 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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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