MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386986858 · doi:10.1016/j.mex.2023.102395

Determining superoxide dismutase content and catalase activity in mammalian cell lines

2023· article· en· W4386986858 on OpenAlexaff
Ilzé Engelbrecht, Suranie Horn, John P. Giesy, Rialet Pieters

Bibliographic record

VenueMethodsX · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersWater Research CommissionDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsSuperoxide dismutaseCatalaseCuvetteAbsorbanceEnzymeChemistryCell cultureBiochemistryFood scienceMolecular biologyChromatographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional methods for determining superoxide dismutase (SOD) content and catalase (CAT) activity rely on measuring the absorbance of individual tissue (biological) samples using a cuvette and spectrophotometer, rather than cell cultures. Although there are kits available for SOD and CAT assays, these allow for high-throughput analysis of samples and might be too expensive for research laboratories in countries from the Global South, such as South Africa. This paper describes a simple and cost-effective method to determine SOD content and CAT activity in mammalian cell cultures following exposure to environmental chemical mixtures by measuring absorbance in 96-well microplates. Moreover, the equipment used for this method is considered standard for cell culture laboratories, while the reagents and consumables are easily obtainable. •Antioxidant enzyme levels can be measured in vitro in cell cultures. •The supernatant obtained can be used to determine protein concentration, SOD content, and CAT activity. •This method is simple and affordable, allowing for the analysis of multiple samples (up to 32 samples per microplate).

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.427
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.034 · 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
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

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethodsXSame topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207