MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366443852 · doi:10.1159/000231664

Immunological Activities of Rat Lymphocytes

2009· article· en· W4366443852 on OpenAlexaff
Raynald Roy, Jean McNicoll, F Daguillard

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Archives of Allergy and Applied Immunology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Radiation Exposure
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThymectomyAntigenSpleenThoracic ductImmunofluorescenceImmunologyBiologyLymphLymphatic systemAntibodyIn vitroMolecular biologyPathologyMedicineMyasthenia gravis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lymphocytes from the peripheral blood, thoracic duct, spleen and lymph nodes of normal, thymectomized (Tx) and thymectomized lethally irradiated marrow reconstituted (TxBM or B rats) Lewis rats were studied for their ability to proliferate in vitro in the presence of Con A or PHA. At the same time the lymphoid tissues of these animals were examined for the presence of B cells or T cells by immunofluorescence staining with antiserums to rat immunoglobulins or rat brain antigens (ARBS), respectively. The specificity of ARBS fort T cells was first established in both cytotoxicity and immunofluorescence studies with thymocytes as well as purified T and B cells. In various lymphoid tissues from Tx and B rats, cells carrying brain antigens were found which were unable to respond to Con A and PHA. Thymectomy has a lesser effect on the response to Con A than to PHA; this was particularly true in the thoracic duct where, following thymectomy, lymphocytes continued to respond to Con A but lost their ability to respond to PHA. This suggests that the response to PHA and Con A may belong to different cells’ subsets but that the ability to respond to either one of these mitogens may be impaired in cells carrying known T cell markers.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0030.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Archives of Allergy and Applied ImmunologySame topicEffects of Radiation ExposureFrench-language works237,207