MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405524256 · doi:10.1093/genetics/iyae167

Detecting gene expression in <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>

2024· review· en· W4405524256 on OpenAlexafffund
John A. Calarco, Seth R. Taylor, David M. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyCaenorhabditis elegansGeneModel organismGeneticsComputational biologyGene expressionPhenotypeGene expression profilingRNAGenomeRegulation of gene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable methods for detecting and analyzing gene expression are necessary tools for understanding development and investigating biological responses to genetic and environmental perturbation. With its fully sequenced genome, invariant cell lineage, transparent body, wiring diagram, detailed anatomy, and wide array of genetic tools, Caenorhabditis elegans is an exceptionally useful model organism for linking gene expression to cellular phenotypes. The development of new techniques in recent years has greatly expanded our ability to detect gene expression at high resolution. Here, we provide an overview of gene expression methods for C. elegans, including techniques for detecting transcripts and proteins in situ, bulk RNA sequencing of whole worms and specific tissues and cells, single-cell RNA sequencing, and high-throughput proteomics. We discuss important considerations for choosing among these techniques and provide an overview of publicly available online resources for gene expression data.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207