DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab078

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00030802

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab072

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029734

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab072

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029684

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab072

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029715

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab072

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029716

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab072

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029735

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab072

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029727

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkac252

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkac252

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkac214

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004597

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkac214

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00033541

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkac214

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00033540

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab328

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab328

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab328

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab328

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab328

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab328

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab328

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab328

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004900

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004487

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004483

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004479

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00036154

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004478

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004309

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004309

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00026340

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN: WBStrain00029224

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00008590

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00008590

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005592

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005592

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029219

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00062142

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000183

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005190

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00026432

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005119

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00327-4

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s42003-022-04031-2

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-33820-w

Resource: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00030553

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00030553

What is this?

DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-33820-w

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.xpro.2023.102250

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.mito.2021.02.001

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.mito.2021.02.001

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.mito.2021.02.001

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.mito.2021.02.001

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.mito.2021.02.001

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105410

Resource: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041079

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041079

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105410

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00026670,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00026670)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00026670

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105410

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00031690

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105410

Resource: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00031503

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00031503

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105410

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105410

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005604

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005037

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00051500

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00021974

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00021974

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004206

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00024123

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004747

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004761

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004683

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105357

Resource: None

Curator: @scibot

SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_139768

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.devcel.2019.10.008

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2021.10.027

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2021.06.040

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029626

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029625

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00055153

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00055017

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00040160

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029735

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029695

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112220

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004003

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2022.111414

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.09.036

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00034065,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00034065)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00034065

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.09.036

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029619

What is this?

DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.09.036

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s13237-022-00407-1

Resource: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005113

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005113

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s13237-022-00407-1

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00029035

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s13237-022-00407-1

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005094

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s13237-022-00407-1

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00005102,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005102)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005102

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s13237-022-00407-1

Resource: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004861

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004861

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s13237-022-00407-1

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s13237-022-00407-1

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s13205-020-02346-7

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s00253-023-12530-3

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s00253-023-12530-3

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/s00253-023-12530-3

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005805

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-1847-9_1

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-1847-9_1

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00030592

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-1847-9_1

Resource: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004346

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004346

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-1847-9_1

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-0592-9_2

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-0592-9_2

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00006269

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00004134

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: None

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00005617

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24803

Resource: Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (RRID:SCR_007341)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_007341

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/cpz1.445

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00041969,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00041969

What is this?

DOI: 10.1002/cpz1.445

Resource: (WB Cat# WBStrain00000001,RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001)

Curator: @sonofthor

SciCrunch record: RRID:WB-STRAIN:WBStrain00000001

What is this?

DOI: 10.7554/eLife.85792

Resource: RRID:Addgene_1494

Curator: @scibot

SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_1494

What is this?

impact of machines/tech on human interaction/ inter&intra-personal relationships is of far greater importance than that which they produce

I believe this film masterfully captures the central theme of this chapter: signal deception. It begins with what appears to be an ordinary teenage vlog, gradually evolving into a chilling tale of trust and control. The narrative's shift from mundane daily life to cult stalking effectively demonstrates to audiences the blurred boundaries between reality and fiction in the internet age.

This article tells us Donald Trump's Twitter posts are not just written by himself, these posts are posted by iPhone and Android phone. And data shows that the posts published by Android phone are written with angrier and more negative tone, which are written by Donald Trump himself. The other half posts are published by staff who are trying to imitate Donald Trump's tone and publish positive views. The article tells us the authenticity and inauthenticity on social media. So we should be able to distinguish what we can trust and what we cannot trust.

This article overall showcases data on Trumps different tweets. When his team is tweeting from an Iphone vs. an Andriod. His Iphone tweets always meant well or good luck. While his Andriod tweets were more progressively aggressive. He used the android to usually insult his rivals or opponents. The writer of this article used python to state his case on how he knows which tweet is curated from which device.

I've always love thriller genres, so this science fiction definitely caught my eye. Lonelygirl15 was viral on YouTube and millions of people subscribed the author because they felt relate to the homeschooled girl who was just sharing her daily life until something went wrong. The story turned into the dark side. People were questioning whether the story is true or not until the truth was revealed that the whole people who appeared in the video were in a cast.

One of the quotes that stood out to me was something said by Jacqueline Keeler of Pollen Nation about white and non-native individuals centering themselves around Native issues. She points out that it makes it even harder for Native American individuals to speak out when "frauds" are speaking for them. McLaughlin's choice to make her fake online persona a Native woman as a white woman is a startling and upsetting factor of this story.

This article basically talked about the design technique which was called CIDER. There are five stages in CIDER, and this technique tried to help users to think beyond "average" user .The five letters meant Critique, Imagine, Design, Expand, Repeat. After I read this article, I learned CIDER played an important role in learners and creators.

The post reinforces the belief that Trump's more combative tone comes through when he tweets from an Android vs. when he tweets from an iPhone, in which he sounds more polished and official, and this distinction suggests different authorship or roles involved in shaping Trump's public voice.

Lonleygirl15 is a great example of authenticity when it comes to online personas. What was an online web series following 16 year old Bree's mundane life which soon spiraled into a mystery revolving around her parent's religion, viewers were drawn to her simple, home recording type videos with a dark twist. However after people became skeptical about Bree, and if her whole story itself was real, people were quick to point out video inconsistencies, and create theories about the whole ordeal. And while the bad press garnered some temporary publicity, the show eventually died off after it was revealed to be scripted with hired actors. Overall, it was that belief that the events and characters were real which drew people to the series in the first place. So of course audiences finding out they were hoaxed inevitably led to the series infamous reputation within online history.

I think it’s interesting how the article showed that Trump’s tweets were not random but followed clear patterns. The idea that the tone and device he used could show which tweets were his own made me realize how carefully public figures can use social media to shape their image. It also makes me think about the power a posts have, one tweet can change people’s opinions or even affect politics.

Jane doesn't open the way, the way opens for her. Almost like fate?

First-person singular pronoun

Regarding deception, I believe that whether online or in real life, the vast majority of people dislike being deceived—especially after choosing to trust something or someone only to discover they've been deceived. The same applies online: whether it's false statements or genuine thoughts, one should never deceive others.

I personally agree this idea, and I also think that people that like to spend their time and money into the relationships actually care about each others more than the people that do not want to invest anything into their relationship. In addition, I think proximity and intimacy should be based on trust. If people do not trust each other, they will not get authentic relationships.

I appreciate that this accepts that not all online interactions need to be entirely authentic. Even humor and play can lead to real connection, assuming people know what sort of interaction they are having.

This chapter about authenticity really make me reflect on the current "performative" male trend. As you may know, the stereotype for these performative males goes along the lines of things like drinking matcha, wearing tote bags, listening to indie music like Clario... etc. In hindsight, you can chop this up as just ones interests, regardless of their gender. But the reason it's such a big trend is because people can sense when a guy is doing it purely for validation. More specifically- female validation, since these interests are more stereotypically women's interests. So like the text reads, "humans do not like to be duped", and when people can tell something is inauthentic, they're not going to take it seriously.

This made me think about how people’s reactions to “fake” content depend on their expectations. Some fans felt betrayed, but others didn’t really care once they knew it was scripted. I feel like this shows that people don’t always need something to be 100% real to enjoy it, they just want to know what kind of relationship they’re in. It reminds me of how influencers act online now. Even if their posts are planned, as long as we know it’s part of their brand and not pretending to be completely natural, it still feels authentic in its own way.

Just like this chapter says, parasocial relationship is very common on social media. Such as influencers and their followers. In Chinese TikTok, the most common way that influencers call their followers is families and brothers no matter they are male or female. This kind of call builds a parasocial relationship between the influencers and their followers by giving followers a illusion that they have a very close relationship with the influencers, so they would be willing to buy the merchandises the influencers are selling. I also followed some influencers such as fitness bloggers and they replied my messages sometimes, but when I asked them work out together face to face, they would reject me. So parasocial relationship is authentic in the way of giving the followers emotional value and support, but it is also inauthentic because influencers are not friends with most of their followers in real life, but they still act that way.

I feel there are a few celebrities or internet personalities I feel a parasocial relation to. I love podcasts, especially the type in which people simply speak about their lives and opinions or tell jokes and comment on current affairs. I think that creating this type of content involves displaying your personality, or a part of your personality at least, on the internet. Consuming this content, it is easy to feel as though you know the individual you are watching and forget that the persona they are presenting is not their true offline personality.

I find this example a bit odd, yet somehow understandable. Sometimes I also find many people on TV rather unbelievable, but I wouldn't go so far as to write them a letter.

eLife Assessment

This important study shows how the relative importance of inter-species interactions in microbiomes can be inferred from empirical species abundance data. The methods based on statistical physics of disordered systems are compelling and rigorous, and allow for distinguishing healthy and non-healthy human gut microbiomes via differences in their inter-species interaction patterns. This work should be of broad interest to researchers in microbial ecology and theoretical biophysics.

Reviewer #1 (Public review):

Summary:

In this manuscript, the authors develop a novel method to infer ecologically-informative parameters across healthy and diseased states of the gut microbiota, although the method is generalizable to other datasets for species abundances. The authors leverage techniques from theoretical physics of disordered systems to infer different parameters-mean and standard deviation for the strength of bacterial interspecies interactions, a bacterial immigration rate, and the strength of demographic noise-that describe the statistics of microbiota samples from two groups-one for healthy subjects and another one for subjects with chronic inflammation syndromes. To do this, the authors simulate communities with a modified version of the Generalized Lotka-Volterra model and randomly-generated interactions, and then use a moment-matching algorithm to find sets of parameters that better reproduce the data for species abundances. They find that these parameters are different for the healthy and diseased microbiota groups. The results suggest, for example, that bacterial interaction strengths, relative to noise and immigration, are more dominant of microbiota dynamics in diseased states than in healthy states.

We think that this manuscript brings an important contribution that will be of interest in the areas of statistical physics, (microbiota) ecology and (biological) data science. The evidence of their results is solid and the work improves the state-of-the-art in terms of methods.

Strengths:

• Using a fairly generic ecological model, the method can identify the change in the relative importance of different ecological forces (distribution of interspecies interactions, demographic noise and immigration) in different sample groups. The authors focus on the case of the human gut microbiota, showing that the data is consistent with a higher influence of species interactions (relative to demographic noise and immigration) in a disease microbiota state than in healthy ones.

• The method is novel, original and it improves the state-of-the-art methodology for the inference of ecologically-relevant parameters. The analysis provides solid evidence on the conclusions.

Weaknesses:

• As a proof of concept for a new inference method, this text maintains a technical focus, which may require some familiarity with statistical physics. Nevertheless, the authors' clear introduction of key mathematical terms and their interpretations, along with a clear discussion of the ecological implications, make the results accessible and easy to follow.

Reviewer #2 (Public review):

Summary:

This valuable work aims to infer, from microbiome data, microbial species interaction patterns associated with healthy and unhealthy human gut microbiomes. Using solid techniques from statistical physics, the authors propose that healthy and unhealthy microbiome interaction patterns substantially differ. Unhealthy microbiomes are closer to instability and single-strain dominance; whereas healthy microbiomes showcase near-neutral dynamics, mostly driven by demographic noise and immigration.

Strengths:

This is a well-written article, relatively easy to follow and transparent despite the high degree of technicality of the underlying theory. The authors provide a powerful inferring procedure, which bypasses the issue of having only compositional data. This work shows that embracing the complexity of microbial systems can be used to our advantage, instead of being an insurmountable obstacle. This is a powerful counterpoint to the classic reductionist view that pushes researchers to study much simpler systems, and only hope to one day scale up their findings.

Weaknesses:

As acknowledged by the authors themselves, this is only a proof of concept. Further research is to better understand the dynamical nature of gut-microbiomes. The authors do however point at ways in which species abundance distributions could be better reproduced by dynamical models. They also suggest that they work could explain prior empirical findings invoking the "Anna Karenina principle", where healthy microbiomes resemble one another, but disease states tend to all differ.

Reviewer #3 (Public review):

Summary:

I found the manuscript to be well-written. I have a few questions regarding the model, though the bulk of my comments are requests to provide definitions and additional clarity. There are concepts and approaches used in this manuscript that are clear boons for understanding the ecology of microbiomes but are rarely considered by researchers approaching the manuscript from a traditional biology background. The authors have clearly considered this in their writing of S1 and S2, so addressing these comments should be straightforward. The methods section is particularly informative and well-written, with sufficient explanations of each step of the derivation that should be informative to researchers in the microbial life sciences that are not well-versed with physics-inspired approaches to ecology dynamics.

Strengths:

The modeling efforts of this study primarily rely on a disordered for of the generalized Lotka-Volterra (gLV) model. This model can be appropriate for investigating certain systems and the authors are clear about when and how more mechanistic models (i.e., consumer-resource) can lead to gLV. Phenomenological models such as this have been found to be highly useful for investigating the ecology of microbiomes, so this modeling choice seems justified, and the limitations are laid out.

Weaknesses:

The authors use metagenomic data of diseased and healthy patients that was first processed in Pasqualini et al. (2024). The use of metagenomic data leads me into a question regarding the role of sampling effort (i.e., read counts) in shaping model parameters such as $h$. This parameter is equal to the average of 1/# species across samples because the data are compositional in nature. My understanding is that $h$ was calculated using total abundances (i.e., read counts). The number of observed species is strongly influenced by sampling effort and the authors addressed this point in their revised manuscript.

However, the role of sampling effort can depend on the type of data and my instinct about the role that sampling effort plays in species detection is primarily based on 16S data. The dependency between these two variables may be less severe for the authors' metagenomic pipeline. This potential discrepancy raises a broader issue regarding the investigation of microbial macroecological patterns and the inference of ecological parameters. Often microbial macroecology researchers rely on 16S rRNA amplicon data because that type of data is abundant and comparatively low-cost. Some in microbiology and bioinformatics are increasingly pushing researchers to choose metagenomics over 16S. Sometimes this choice is valid (discovery of new MAGs, investigate allele frequency changes within species, etc.), sometimes it is driven by the false equivalence "more data = better". The outcome though is that we have a body of more-or-less established microbial macroecological patterns which rest on 16S data and are now slowly incorporating results from metagenomics. To my knowledge there has not been a systematic evaluation of the macroecological patterns that do and do not vary by one's choice in 16S vs. metagenomics. Several of the authors in this manuscript have previously compared the MAD shape for 16S and metagenomic datasets in Pasqualini et al., but moving forward a more comprehensive study seems necessary (2024). These points were addressed by the authors in their revised manuscript.

Final review: The authors addressed all comments and I have no additional comments.

References

Pasqualini, Jacopo, et al. "Emergent ecological patterns and modelling of gut microbiomes in health and in disease." PLOS Computational Biology 20.9 (2024): e1012482.

不要自我、从这个意义上来讲，人工智能已经超越了我们，从这个维度上来讲，是这样的。但是人类的维度到底有多少个维度，我们不知道，

当人们不断地深入的持续的用量化语言去描述客观世界的时候一步步的发展最终也到了一个终结的形态就是语言他开始对自身也进行量化的时候，这就是一个转变的基点，出现了非常神奇，语言也开始被自身所量化。

在语言模块，我们真正要讨论的是与自然语言形成鲜明对照的纯量化语言——形式语言，比如数学、逻辑学以及由此衍生的编程语言。 在我的任职过往的经历中，从来没有有人将语言进行这样一种维度的划分和理解，并对他们进行分类，但他的这样一种视角独特的视角确确实实又将语言的种类划分的如此的清晰，让我无法找到破绽，确实诸如数学逻辑，编程等等，这一类语言，他需要的就是一种准确的量化的东而正是一种这样准确和量化的东西，它可以将我们现实的世界进行精准的描述刻画来自于进一步的控制控制前提就是因为我们能够进行精准的量化才能够进一步的去控制他，这一点是前提，例如物理，化学电路等等

事实上，诸多的这种杂种词，他是在强行的将本质与量化之间进行一种牵连，如果你不去深刻的追究他的本质，你很容易就认为他说的言之有言有趣，好像是那么回事儿，但本质上来讲，你的情绪能够进行与成本进行转换吗？你所拥有的机会能够进行转换吗？当你拥有的机会可以进行转换的时候，那是否就能够证明真的有一种平行宇宙的存在，但是平行宇宙之间它的价值存在意义有没有？我们现在都需要去论证他的时候这边我们却容易种大量的机会成本杂种是仿佛已经去描述了这个世界的存在的确凿性一定性，这是极为肤浅和不认真的表现。

那么问题时，为什么会大量的出现这种杂种词？这种词汇会广泛的存在呢？并被大家认可接受呢？

人类社会的内核常常与可见物无关，这一句话极为深刻现实生活中我们看到的大多数我们追求的很多时候都是用一种可见物，却衡量比较量化，但现实中我们真正的人类的内核的东西却是一些看不见摸不着，但是你感受得到的东西，例如美正义，善良意义，真理、愉悦等等。

在我们当前的这个社会中，越来越多的有一种量化的东西与这种无形的本质的内核的东西正在不断地进行融合生了这种叫做本质与量化之间的杂种词，两者融合杂交形成的大量的这种词汇，例如机会成本、情绪价值，沉默成本等。

当认识到眼睛能够对人的认知，人类社会的发展来自于对整个人类的进化产生极为深刻的影响的同时并没有就此停下来，而是深刻的抛出了另外一个问题，还有没有另外一种方式对人类的影响更为深刻和持久答案是有的，那就是语言语言从某种程度上来讲，他真的是人类的特殊产物和独一份的能力，他不同于教他是用一种发音有形文字意义及为深刻的融合在一起以后形成的一种媒介，它对于知识的传播，对于人的大脑的塑造，以及对人类社会群体共同认知运行模式的形成，影响都极为的深刻。

从这个意义上来讲，眼睛，它作为一种输入的渠道和人能取的主要感觉器官，他对人的大脑以及人类社会和人的意识的影响都极为深刻，通过这个地方去影响人类自然而然的会影响到一个人的认知而影响到一个群体的意识和整个社会的运行模式。

只要自己还是一个社会的人，还在世俗间挣扎，你就无法摒弃，或者说是不在乎别人的感受，只要你还有这种心态存在，你就还停留在世俗之中，而当你完全的不在乎别人的感受，不需要别人的评价，去证实自己的时候，实际上就已经是处于一种不在三类不在五行之中了，你已经是用一种出世的心态停留在世界。所以，我们所有想要表达的东西实时都是表达给世俗的人去倾听，想要得到这些俗人的一份认可而已。

I've noticed that whenever I post new pictures of myself, I aim to present a more positive image and show how enjoyable and delightful my life is, even though it may be the opposite reality in real life. For example, the styles of my Instagram post tend to be more delicate and gorgeous because that is my social card, but when I talk with my friends in the group chat, I become more down-to-earth and relatively more real. I don't really like this because it compromises my authenticity, as I feel it is dangerous to show your true side to a completely public area where all your followers can see. It's more like a social mask to protect yourself.

In ways I believe it is human nature to naturally change yourself and your actions based on the environment or people you are around. For me personally I do act differently between my family,friends,peers,cowrokers,teachers,etc. On social media especially I express myself in 2 different ways on 2 different accounts. On my main I don't really post that often but on the spam with my close friends I tend to post non stop. This doesn't change how authentic I am I would say, I just perceive myself to others in the appropriate time and place. I'm still myself at the end of the day but I could see how it could potentially contradict myself from an outside perspective.

Love the detailed etymology on Wikitionary. A spectucular resource

This was a great tutorial

I believe using your own life experiences in this way can be very helpful in developing new and fun things to write about.

I like the thought of this.

Using the first part of your introduction to hook your reader

A thesis is a main idea or central statement that is defended or demonstrated in a text, essay, or research.

A parity bit flip is detected when an odd number of bits in the data and parity bit are changed during transmission

A parity bit is flipped when an error occurs during transmission, causing the total number of 1s in the data to change, and the receiver detects an error because the received parity doesn't match the original parity rules

To be a good researcher, you must understand how knowledge is created and justified within your specific field. Epistemology refers to the theory of knowledge (how we know what we know)

Suggests that research isn’t static; it grows and deepens. I should expect my topic to evolve as I dig deeper.

This reminds me of how my narrative began—with questions about family legacy and identity. It frames research not just as academic, but as a meaningful quest.

wrong

Question: If you are reading a text from a credible source should you still check that the sources in their bibliography are credible?

This is an interesting take and it makes me appreciate anyone who shares valuable research for others. I can imagine people have worked together on research all around the world.

Each topic is broad and cannot be covered in a single investigation.

It tells about how importance of students doing the standard English.

Although the author does mention and repeating the importance of transparency and keeping players safe, the author doesn't provide any examples.

Through this section, it shows that this article is mainly industry perspective on AI and ethics. It mainly mentions how AI is improving the industry rather than the ethic issues.

The section shows the awareness of the issues of AI on the ethic challenges to the problems such as player privacy. It also mentions that transparent communication are essential in using AI on video games. The article was published in 2023, which means this issue has been recognize long before.

important aspect

main idea/thesis

important idea

要改為 納入當日「t0+10 無效彙整」告警

Taney is saying the Constitution should always be read the same way it was when it was first written no matter how society changes this is pure originalism. I disagree because if we followed this logic blindly equality and progress would've never happened.

Here he's attacking the Missouri Compromise through originalist property arguments. He's prioritizing what the framers thought about property over evolving ideas about justice. I disagree because that law was meant to limit slavery's spread not harm anyone's real rights.

Taney uses the historical context of the 1770s to argue that Black people were never part of the political community. It's another way he locks the meaning of the constitution in the past. I disagree because laws should reflect growth not just the history.

He's framing slavery as a property issue, using the original understanding of the Fifth Amendment to defend it. That's how he tries to strike down anti slavery laws. I disagree because this treats human beings as objects instead of recognizing their rights.

Taney argues that citizenship only applied to White people because that's how he claims that framers saw it. It's a textbook originalist move taking their intent as absolute. I disagree because it purposely shuts out anyone who didn't fit their narrow view.

Taney is basically saying that when the Constitution was written, Black people weren't meant to be part of the people. He's leaning on what he thinks the framers originally meant. I find this reasoning outdated because it freezes the law in a time when equality wasn't valued.

main idea

thesis

Denouement/Resolution

Falling Action

Climax, reflections, falling action

points to a climax

overcoming obstacles

obstacle

obstacle

intro - the Exposition

interesting connection to the text

This really connects to my project because I am using digital tools to be able to make history engaging for people, like digital archaeology, I'm "marketing" the past while using visuals from Voyant.

Thinking deeply into what the writer intends in their writing can open the door to view a source from a new angle and therefore open the door for more information and ideas.

Highlighting is an old and commonly used technique for good reason, it can enforce reading more deeply and looking further into sources used in your writing.

The use of personal questions can elevate one's writing by expanding thinking and expanding one's point of view.

I have to also remember that Voyant is not neutral, the results depend on how the text is prepared. Even simple tools can reflect bias in what we give them.

This also connects to my project because its like a public archaeology, showing people how trade and culture shaped what was eaten

After years of her mother talking about their father’s brother accident. The boy didn’t stop his little brother from becoming a musician