Examining Apical or Basolateral Protein Localization in<i>Aedes aegypti</i>Tissues: Cross-Section Immunohistochemistry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is an important technique that permits visualization of cellular components and for determining the presence and/or distribution of proteins or other macromolecules in tissue samples. Normally, IHC involves the detection of epitopes using an antigen-specific primary antibody and a secondary antibody coupled with a reporter molecule or fluorophore that can bind to the primary antibody, allowing for the spatial distribution of a protein of interest to be detected. Although normally IHC does not provide quantitative results compared to techniques such as enzyme-linked immunoassay or western blotting, it permits the localization, expression mapping, and distribution of target proteins in intact tissues. Here, we describe an IHC protocol for examining apical versus basolateral protein staining through sectioning tissue samples from fixed, embedded tissues (e.g., IHC-paraffin) and adding primary antibodies against a target protein. This IHC protocol provides a guide for tissue fixation, sectioning, and staining of tissue samples.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
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".