MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Comprehensive Protocol for Total Protein Extraction, Precipitation, and Assay Measurement from Plankton Samples v2

2024· preprint· en· W4406892944 on OpenAlexaff
Yingyu Hu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanktonPrecipitationProtein precipitationProtocol (science)Extraction (chemistry)ChromatographyEnvironmental scienceChemistryBiologyGeographyEcologyMeteorologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This protocol outlines an optimized method for extracting total protein from plankton samples, encompassing both phytoplankton and zooplankton. The procedure involves the use of lysing matrix tubes with beads of varying sizes (0.1 mm, 1.4 mm, and 4 mm), eight homogenizing cycles, and a protein extraction buffer composed of 2% SDS, 10% glycerol, 5 mM EDTA in 100 mM Tris (pH 7). The extracted crude protein is quantified using the Pierce Micro BCA assay equivalent to bovine serum albumin (BSA), with a linear detection range of 12.5 to 1000 ug/sample. To remove interference from chlorophyll, monosaccharides and other substances, the extracted protein undergoes precipitation using a chloroform and methanol solvent mixture, followed by re-dissolution in re-solubilization buffer composed of 1% sarcosine in 50 mM Tris (pH 7). BCA assay is then used to quantify the precipitated protein, with BSA as the standard. The absence of glycerol and the use of sarcosine instead of SDS enable a linear detection range of 5 to 2000 µg/sample. https://assets.thermofisher.com/TFS-Assets/LSG/manuals/MAN0011430_Pierce_BCA_Protein_Asy_UG.pdf

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.064

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 head0.335
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.110 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScientific Computing and Data Management→French-language works237,207→