MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383058591 · doi:10.1101/pdb.prot108161

Whole-Larva Cryosectioning and Immunolabeling of<i>Drosophila</i>Larvae

2023· article· en· W4383058591 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine Clayworth, Mary Gilbert, Vanessa J. Auld

Bibliographic record

VenueCold Spring Harbor Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFossil Insects in Amber
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrosophila melanogasterCoronal planeImmunolabelingResolution (logic)BiologyLarvaMelanogasterAnatomyPlane (geometry)MicroscopyMaterials scienceOpticsPhysicsBotanyComputer scienceGeometryMathematicsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resolution in microscopy—the shortest distance between which objects can be distinguished from each other—is crucial for our ability to view details of biological samples. The theoretical resolution limit of light microscopy is 200 nm in the x,y -plane. Using stacks of x,y images, 3D reconstructions of the z -plane of a specimen can be achieved. However, because of the nature of light diffraction, the resolution of the z -plane reconstitutions is closer to 500–600 nm. Peripheral nerves of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster consist of several thin layers of glial cells surrounding the underlying axons. The size of these components can be well under the resolution of z -plane 3D reconstructions, thus making it difficult to determine details of coronal views through these peripheral nerves. Here, we describe a protocol to obtain and immunolabel 10-μm cryosections of whole third-instar larvae of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster . Cryosectioning the larvae using this method converts visualization of coronal sections of the peripheral nerve into the x,y -plane and brings the resolution down from 500–600 nm to 200 nm. Theoretically, this protocol can also be used with some modifications to obtain cross sections of other tissues.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.010

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.256
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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCold Spring Harbor ProtocolsSame topicFossil Insects in AmberFrench-language works237,207