Muscle Spindles in Extraocular Muscles of Human Infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The capacity of muscle spindles in adult human extraocular muscles (EOM) to provide effective proprioception was questioned on the grounds of their peculiar morphology. Their appearance could be attributable to ageing and to test this possibility examples of infant muscle spindles have been examined. Forty encapsulated structures from five extraocular muscles removed post mortem from 4 infant patients aged 6 days, 5, 23 and 30 months were examined by means of light microscopy using serial transverse sections. Seven of them were identified as false spindles. The remaining 33 structures, identified as spindles, contained a total of 175 intrafusal fibres varying from 2 to 12 (mean: 6) in each. 130 of these fibres (74.3%) were of nuclear chain type. Unequivocal evidence of bag fibres was not found. Spindles lacked or had a limited equatorial expansion, and the inner capsule was incomplete and irregularly shaped. 45 (25.7%) of the intrafusal fibres had extrafusal features with large diameters, peripherally placed nuclei, no equatorial modification and without associated sensory nerve terminals. Serial sections revealed that a majority of the nuclear chain fibres were interrupted, fragmented or terminated abruptly, and most spindles contained at least one incomplete fibre. These observations show that the atypical features observed in adult human EOM spindles are also present in infants and are therefore not attributable to ageing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".