Does 3D orientation account for variation in osteon morphology assessed by 2D histology?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary microstructural unit of cortical bone, the secondary osteon or Haversian system, is widely assumed to have a cylindrical shape. It is generally accepted that osteons are roughly circular in cross-section and deviations from circularity have been attributed to deviations from longitudinal orientation. To our knowledge this idealized geometric relationship, which assumes osteons are perfect cylinders, has not been rigorously explored. As such, we sought to explore two research questions: (i) Does the orientation of osteons in 3D explain variation in shapes visualized in 2D? (ii) Can differences in osteon 3D orientation explain previously reported age-related differences observed in their 2D cross-sectional shape (e.g. more circular shape and decreased area with age)? To address these questions we utilized a combination of 2D histology to identify osteon shape and superimposed micro-computed tomography data to assess osteon orientation in 3D based upon the osteonal canal. Shape was assessed by the inverse of Aspect Ratio (On.AspR(-1), based on a fitted ellipse) - which ranged from 0 (infinitely elongated shape) to 1 (perfectly circular). A sample (n = 27) of human female anterior femoral cortical bone samples from across the human lifespan (20-87 years) were included in the analysis, which involved 1418 osteons. The overall mean measure of On.AspR(-1) was 0.703 (1.42 Aspect Ratio). Mean osteon orientation was 79.1° (90° being longitudinal). While we anticipated a positive relation between orientation and On.AspR(-1), we found the opposite - a weak negative correlation (with more oblique 3D osteon alignment, the 2D shape became more circular as reflected by increased On.AspR(-1)). When analysis of covariance was performed with age and orientation as covariates, the negative relation with orientation was replaced by a significant relation with age alone. This relation with age accounted for 41% of the variation of On.AspR(-1). The results revealed that osteons, on average, are not circular in cross-section and that 3D orientation cannot account for deviation from circular shape. Osteons thus are strictly speaking not cylinders, as they tend to have elliptical cross-sections. We observed that osteons did become less elliptical in cross-section with age independent of orientation - suggesting this is a real change in morphology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".