Whole-Larva Cryosectioning and Immunolabeling of<i>Drosophila</i>Larvae
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it