MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W570582304 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2015.05.007

Prenatal alcohol exposure alters gene expression in the rat brain: Experimental design and bioinformatic analysis of microarray data

2015· article· en· W570582304 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexandre A. Lussier, Katarzyna Stępień, Joanne Weinberg, Michael S. Kobor

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteLearning PartnershipUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsMicroarray analysis techniquesMicroarrayGene expressionGeneBioinformaticsComputational biologyBiologyGene expression profilingGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We previously identified gene expression changes in the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus of rats prenatally exposed to alcohol under both steady-state and challenge conditions (Lussier et al., 2015, Alcohol.: Clin. Exp. Res., 39, 251-261). In this study, adult female rats from three prenatal treatment groups (ad libitum-fed control, pair-fed, and ethanol-fed) were injected with physiological saline solution or complete Freund׳s adjuvant (CFA) to induce arthritis (adjuvant-induced arthritis, AA). The prefrontal cortex and hippocampus were collected 16 days (peak of arthritis) or 39 days (during recovery) following injection, and whole genome gene expression was assayed using Illumina׳s RatRef-12 expression microarray. Here, we provide additional metadata, detailed explanations of data pre-processing steps and quality control, as well as a basic framework for the bioinformatic analyses performed. The datasets from this study are publicly available on the GEO repository (accession number GSE63561).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207