Measuring the pH, Redox Chemistries, and Degradative Capacity of Macropinosomes using Dual-Fluorophore Ratiometric Microscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, the field of macropinocytosis has grown rapidly. Macropinocytosis has emerged as a central mechanism by which innate immune cells maintain organismal homeostasis and immunity. Simultaneously, and in contrast to its homeostatic role, it can also drive various pathologies, including cancer and viral infections. Unlike other modes of endocytosis, the tools developed for studying the maturation of macropinosomes remain underdeveloped. Here the protocol describes newly developed tools for studying the redox environment within the lumen of early and maturing macropinosomes. Methodologies for using ratiometric fluorescence microscopy in assessing the pH, production of reactive oxygen species, and the degradative capacity within the lumen of individual macropinosomes in live cells are described. Single organelle measurements offer the advantage of revealing spatiotemporal heterogeneity, which is often lost with population-based approaches. Emphasis is placed on the basic principles of dual fluorophore ratiometric microscopy, including probe selection, instrumentation, calibration, and single-cell versus population-based methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".