MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047050195 · doi:10.3390/mi11080756

Parallel-Channel Electrotaxis and Neuron Screening of Caenorhabditis elegans

2020· article· en· W3047050195 on OpenAlexafffund
Daphne Archonta, Terrance J. Kubiseski, Anurag Tandon, Pouya Rezai

Bibliographic record

VenueMicromachines · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsOccupational Cancer Research CentreYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Trillium FoundationOntario Ministry of Economic Development and InnovationCMC Microsystems
KeywordsCaenorhabditis elegansBiologyNeurotoxinModel organismPhenotypic screeningNeurosciencePhenotypeGeneticsGeneBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we report a novel microfluidic method to conduct a Caenorhabditis elegans electrotaxis movement assay and neuronal imaging on up to 16 worms in parallel. C. elegans is a model organism for neurodegenerative disease and movement disorders such as Parkinson’s disease (PD), and for screening chemicals that alleviate protein aggregation, neuronal death, and movement impairment in PD. Electrotaxis of C. elegans in microfluidic channels has led to the development of neurobehavioral screening platforms, but enhancing the throughput of the electrotactic behavioral assay has remained a challenge. Our device consisted of a hierarchy of tree-like channels for worm loading into 16 parallel electrotaxis screening channels with equivalent electric fields. Tapered channels at the ends of electrotaxis channels were used for worm immobilization and fluorescent imaging of neurons. Parallel electrotaxis of worms was first validated against established single-worm electrotaxis phenotypes. Then, mutant screening was demonstrated using the NL5901 strain, carrying human α-synuclein in the muscle cells, by showing the associated electrotaxis defects in the average speed, body bend frequency (BBF), and electrotaxis time index (ETI). Moreover, chemical screening of a PD worm model was shown by exposing the BZ555 strain, expressing green fluorescence protein (GFP) in the dopaminergic neurons (DNs), to 6-hydroxydopamine neurotoxin. The neurotoxin-treated worms exhibited a reduction in electrotaxis swimming speed, BBF, ETI, and DNs fluorescence intensity. We envision our technique to be used widely in C. elegans-based movement disorder assays to accelerate behavioral and cellular phenotypic investigations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicromachinesSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207