Role and relevance of fish cell lines in advanced in vitro research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cell line derived from fish has been established as a promising tool for studying many key issues of aquaculture covering fish growth, disease, reproduction, genetics, and biotechnology. In addition, fish cell lines are very useful in vitro models for toxicological, pathological, and immunological studies. The easier maintenance of fish cell lines in flexible temperature regimes and hypoxic conditions make them preferable in vitro tools over mammalian cell lines. Great excitement has been observed in establishing and characterizing new fish cell lines representing diverse fish species and tissue types. The well-characterized and authenticated cell lines are of utmost essential as these represent cellular functions very similar to in vivo state of an organism otherwise it would affect the reproducibility of scientific research. CONCLUSION: The fish cell lines have exhibited encouraging results in several key aspects of in vitro research in aquaculture including virology, nutrition and metabolism, production of vaccines, and transgenic fish production. The review paper reports the cell lines developed from fish, their characterization, and biobanking along with their potential applications and challenges in in vitro research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".