Inappropriateness of RNAlater to preserve Caenorhabditis elegans for RNA extraction
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
Caenorhabditis elegans is a well-established laboratory animal model and has been widely used in biological research. However, it is still a challenge to obtain a good amount of quality RNA from a limited number of C. elegans for gene expression studies. To address this issue, the present study has compared different conditions to preserve C. elegans for RNA extraction after the failure of an initial effort to use RNAlater-preserved worms for RNA extraction. The effects of different concentrations of proteinase K, different worm life stages, and different worm numbers on RNA extraction were also investigated. The best results were achieved under the following conditions: 1) adult worms that were either freshly prepared or quickly frozen in liquid nitrogen followed by storage at −80 °C; 2) disruption of C. elegans with proteinase K (1 mg/mL) in a lysis buffer (65 °C for 10 min) prior to extraction with Trizol agent. This method can provide a stable, rapid, and effective means to extract RNA from C. elegans with variable worm numbers from 20 to 200.•RNAlater was inappropriate for preserving C. elegans for effective RNA extraction.•Proteinase K was verified for lysing a limited number of C. elegans for RNA extraction.
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 | 0.001 | 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