MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376524608 · doi:10.1039/d2an01916g

Saline dry fixation for improved cell composition analysis using Raman spectroscopy

2023· article· en· W4376524608 on OpenAlexafffund
Shreyas Rangan, Riley Wong, H. Georg Schulze, Martha Z. Vardaki, Michael W. Blades, Robin F. B. Turner, James M. Piret

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Analyst · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical Research
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsRaman spectroscopySalinePrincipal component analysisChemistryFixation (population genetics)Analytical Chemistry (journal)ChromatographyBiochemistryInternal medicineOpticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

chemical fixatives. We compared the Raman spectroscopy of saline dry-fixed cells with the more commonly used formaldehyde and methanol fixation and found that dry-fixed cell spectra preserved more cellular information than either chemical fixative. We also assessed the stability of dry-fixed cells over time and found that they were stable for at least 5 months. Finally, a comparison of dry-fixed and live cell spectra revealed effects due to the hydration state of the cells since they were recovered upon rehydrating dry-fixed samples. Thus, for fixed cell Raman spectroscopy, we recommend dry-fixation with unbuffered saline as a superior method to formaldehyde or methanol fixation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AnalystSame topicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical ResearchFrench-language works237,207