Animal Models of Facial Clefting: Experimental, Congenital, and Transgenic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Animal models are important for advancing the understanding of complex gene-environmental interactions involved in normal and abnormal craniofacial morphogenesis. Formation of the face, the primary palate (lip) and the secondary palate involve complex regional development that must be spatially and temporally coordinated with growth and development of adjacent and supportive structures. These facial components have developmental thresholds that limit their formation to a critical period when conditions are favourable for contact, fusion and merging. Median clefts, cleft lip with or without cleft palate (CL/P), and isolated cleft palate (CP) are congenital anomalies that can arise from failure of a number of developmental processes due to many different genetic factors and environmental factors. Mouse mutants have provided genetic models for analysing features that increase probability of spontaneous clefts and increase susceptibility and/or sensitivity to environmentally-induced clefts. Transgenic mouse models are providing novel approaches to targeted gene disruption. In this chapter we focus on mutant mouse models and identify features that appear similar to human development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".