MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399382508 · doi:10.1177/03009858241257920

Effects of fixation and demineralization on histomorphology and DNA amplification of canine bone marrow

2024· article· en· W4399382508 on OpenAlex
Gabriella Diamantino, Janet Beeler‐Marfisi, Robert A. Foster, William Sears, Alice Defarges, William Vernau, Dorothee Bienzle

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Pathology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematological disorders and diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDemineralizationFormic acidChemistryHydrochloric acidMolecular biologyChromatographyBiologyDentistryMedicineEnamel paint

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fixation and demineralization protocols for bone marrow (BM) across diagnostic laboratories are not standardized. How different protocols affect histomorphology and DNA amplification is incompletely understood. In this study, 2 fixatives and 3 demineralization methods were tested on canine BM samples. Twenty replicate sternal samples obtained within 24 hours of death were fixed overnight in either acetic acid-zinc-formalin (AZF) or 10% neutral-buffered formalin (NBF) and demineralized with formic acid for 12 hours. Another 53 samples were fixed in AZF and demineralized with hydrochloric acid for 1-hour, formic acid for 12 hours, or ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) for 24 hours. Histologic sections were scored by 4 raters as of insufficient, marginal, good, or excellent quality. In addition, DNA samples extracted from sections treated with the different fixation and demineralization methods were amplified with 3 sets of primers to conserved regions of T cell receptor gamma and immunoglobulin heavy chain genes. Amplification efficiency was graded based on review of capillary electrophoretograms. There was no significant difference in the histomorphology scores of sections fixed in AZF or NBF. However, EDTA-based demineralization yielded higher histomorphology scores than demineralization with hydrochloric or formic acid, whereas formic acid resulted in higher scores than hydrochloric acid. Demineralization with EDTA yielded DNA amplification in 29 of 36 (81%) samples, whereas demineralization with either acid yielded amplification in only 2 of 72 (3%) samples. Although slightly more time-consuming and labor-intensive, tissue demineralization with EDTA results in superior morphology and is critical for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification with the DNA extraction method described in this article.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.260 · 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