MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389611632 · doi:10.1101/2023.12.11.571125

Radical pairs and superoxide amplification can explain magnetic field effects on planarian regeneration

2023· preprint· en· W4389611632 on OpenAlexaff
Rishabh Rishabh, Hadi Zadeh‐Haghighi, Christoph Simon

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlanarian Biology and Electrostimulation
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanarianPlanariaSuperoxideRegeneration (biology)Reactive oxygen speciesChemistryMagnetic fieldBiophysicsBiologyPhysicsCell biologyBiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Weak magnetic field exposure can affect many biological processes across a wide range of living organisms. Recently, it has been observed that weak magnetic fields can modulate reactive oxygen species (ROS) concentration, affecting regeneration in planaria. These effects show unusual nonlinear dependence on magnetic field strength, including a sign change. In another study by the same group, superoxide is identified as the particular ROS being modulated. We propose a radical pair mechanism based on a flavin-superoxide radical pair to explain the modulation of superoxide production and its effect on planarian regeneration. The results of our calculations favor a triplet-born radical pair. Our yield calculations can reproduce the observed magnetic field dependence, including the sign change. Moreover, to explain the size of the effect on ROS concentration, we suggest a simple amplification model inspired by known biochemical mechanisms and lay out the conditions for such a model to work. Further, we also make empirical predictions concerning the hypomagnetic field effects on planarian regeneration.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicPlanarian Biology and ElectrostimulationFrench-language works237,207