MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209707765

Characterization of neuron development in GDF11 zebrafish mutants

2017· article· en· W3209707765 on OpenAlexaff
Carmen Duursema

Bibliographic record

VenueStudent Research Proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZebrafishDanioBiologyModel organismMutantGeneGeneticsPhenotypeMutationIn situ hybridizationCell biologyGene expression
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The zebrafish (Danio rerio) has become an excellent model organism for studying vertebrate development and disease. More than 1000 zebrafish mutants have been identified, where changes in specific genes have correlated with human defects. Many of these mutations occur in genes with orthologues in humans, leading to the creation of animal models that resemble human disease types. Examples of this are demonstrated by mutations seen in bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) family members in both humans and zebrafish. This project investigated whether mutations in the BMP growth differentiation factor 11 (GDF11) gene result in deficits during zebrafish neuron development. Neuronal development was characterized using in situ hybridization and immunofluorescence techniques. Changes in neuronal development were examined using probes recognizing neurons, including RMO44 and acetylated tubulin. Experimental results from this preliminary characterization contribute to the on-going characterization of phenotypes seen in GDF11 mutants. Discipline: Biology Faculty Mentor: Dr. Lisa Prichard

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudent Research ProceedingsSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207