Protocol development for discovery of angiogenesis inhibitors via automated methods using zebrafish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Their optical clarity as larvae and embryos, small size, and high fecundity make zebrafish ideal for whole animal high throughput screening. A high-throughput drug discovery platform (HTP) has been built to perform fully automated screens of compound libraries with zebrafish embryos. A Tg(kdrl:EGFP) line, marking endothelial cell cytoplasm, was used in this work to help develop protocols and functional algorithms for the system, with the intent of screening for angiogenesis inhibitors. Indirubin 3' Monoxime (I3M), a known angiogenesis inhibitor, was used at various concentrations to validate the protocols. Consistent with previous studies, a dose dependant inhibitory effect of I3M on angiogenesis was confirmed. The methods and protocols developed here could significantly increase the throughput of drug screens, while limiting human errors. These methods are expected to facilitate the discovery of novel anti-angiogenesis compounds and can be adapted for many other applications in which samples have a good fluorescent signal.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.012 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".