Fabrication of Microelectrodes, Suction Electrodes, and Focal Electrodes for Electrophysiological Recording in<i>Drosophila</i>
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
Electrophysiological recording is a group of techniques used to record electrical field potentials generated by cells. These techniques rely on several types of electrodes, which can be manufactured in the laboratory. In intracellular recording, glass microelectrodes are used to pierce the cell membrane, and then to measure the electrical potential difference between the inside and the outside of the cell. Another technique, called loose patch or focal recording, is similar to intracellular recording but the electrode tip does not pierce into the cell membrane. Rather, the electrode tip is placed near a nerve or the postsynaptic side of the neuromuscular junction (NMJ) to record extracellular changes in local potentials. A third technique involves a suction electrode, which is used to draw part of the motor nerve into the electrode so that electrical pulses can be applied to elicit action potentials of the nerve. Suction electrodes are specifically used to evoke synaptic potentials at the Drosophila larval NMJ. This protocol details some basic methods for manufacturing microelectrodes used for intracellular recording and two-electrode voltage-clamp and loose patch electrodes used for focal recording. In addition, a method is provided for manufacturing homemade suction electrodes used for nerve stimulation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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