Establishing an air-liquid interface exposure system for exposure of lung cells to gases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: compared to submerged cell cultures. Additionally, airborne exposures should allow for closer modeling of human lung toxicity. However, such exposures present technical challenges, including maintaining optimal cell health, and establishing consistent exposure monitoring and control. We aimed to establish a reliable system and procedures for cell exposures to gases at the ALI. METHODS: We tested and adapted a horizontal-flow ALI-exposure system to verify and optimize temperature, humidity/condensation, and control of atmosphere delivery. We measured temperature and relative humidity (RH) throughout the system, including at the outlet (surrogate measures) and at the well, and evaluated viability of lung epithelial A549 cells under control conditions. Exposure stability, dosimetry, and toxicity were tested using ozone. RESULTS: Temperatures measured directly above wells vs. outflow differed; using above-well temperature enabled determination of near-well RH. Under optimized conditions, the viability of A549 cells exposed to clean air (2 h) in the ALI system was unchanged from incubator-grown cells. In-well ozone levels, determined through reaction with potassium indigotrisulfonate, confirmed dosing. Cells exposed to 200 ppb ozone at the ALI presented reduced viability, while submerged cells did not. CONCLUSION: Our results emphasize the importance of monitoring near-well conditions rather than relying on surrogate measures. Rigorous assessment of ALI exposure conditions led to procedures for reproducible exposure of cells to gases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".