MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286852269 · doi:10.3791/51185-v

Determining the Ice-binding Planes of Antifreeze Proteins by Fluorescence-based Ice Plane Affinity

2014· article· en· W4286852269 on OpenAlexaff
Koli Basu, Christopher P. Garnham, Yoshiyuki Nishimiya, Sakae Tsuda, Ido Braslavsky, Peter L. Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntifreeze proteinIce crystalsFluorescenceChemistryBiophysicsAmorphous iceNanotechnologyBiologyCrystallographyBiochemistryMaterials scienceOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antifreeze proteins (AFPs) are expressed in a variety of cold-hardy organisms to prevent or slow internal ice growth. AFPs bind to specific planes of ice through their ice-binding surfaces. Fluorescence-based ice plane affinity (FIPA) analysis is a modified technique used to determine the ice planes to which the AFPs bind. FIPA is based on the original ice-etching method for determining AFP-bound ice-planes. It produces clearer images in a shortened experimental time. In FIPA analysis, AFPs are fluorescently labeled with a chimeric tag or a covalent dye then slowly incorporated into a macroscopic single ice crystal, which has been preformed into a hemisphere and oriented to determine the a- and c-axes. The AFP-bound ice hemisphere is imaged under UV light to visualize AFP-bound planes using filters to block out nonspecific light. Fluorescent labeling of the AFPs allows real-time monitoring of AFP adsorption into ice. The labels have been found not to influence the planes to which AFPs bind. FIPA analysis also introduces the option to bind more than one differently tagged AFP on the same single ice crystal to help differentiate their binding planes. These applications of FIPA are helping to advance our understanding of how AFPs bind to ice to halt its growth and why many AFP-producing organisms express multiple AFP isoforms.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207