Imaging the subcellular viscoelastic properties of mouse oocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, cellular biomechanical properties have been investigated as an alternative to morphological assessments for oocyte selection in reproductive science. Despite the high relevance of cell viscoelasticity characterization, the reconstruction of spatially distributed viscoelastic parameter images in such materials remains a major challenge. Here, a framework for mapping viscoelasticity at the subcellular scale is proposed and applied to live mouse oocytes. The strategy relies on the principles of optical microelastography for imaging in combination with the overlapping subzone nonlinear inversion technique for complex-valued shear modulus reconstruction. The three-dimensional nature of the viscoelasticity equations was accommodated by applying an oocyte geometry-based 3D mechanical motion model to the measured wave field. Five domains-nucleolus, nucleus, cytoplasm, perivitelline space, and zona pellucida-could be visually differentiated in both oocyte storage and loss modulus maps, and statistically significant differences were observed between most of these domains in either property reconstruction. The method proposed herein presents excellent potential for biomechanical-based monitoring of oocyte health and complex transformations across lifespan. It also shows appreciable latitude for generalization to cells of arbitrary shape using conventional microscopy equipment.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".