Growth and differentiation of cultured satellite cells from callipyge and normal lambs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested whether the muscle enlargement found in callipyge sheep is linked to increased proliferation, differentiation, and protein accrual of cultured satellite cells. Satellite cells were isolated from the longissimus muscle of three callipyge and three normal lambs. The satellite cells were grown using serum from horse, normal lambs, and callipyge lambs and cultured under conditions that promoted differentiation into myotubes and accumulation of myofibrillar protein. There was no difference in the population doubling times (PDT) or fusion percentages for callipyge and normal satellite cells, but PDT was longer (P < 0.05) for satellite cells grown in callipyge serum (pooled mean PDT = 22 h) than for cells grown in normal sheep serum (PDT = 20 h) or horse serum (PDT = 18 h). The protein:DNA ratios of the cultures increased during 96 h in differentiation media (P < 0.01), but there was no difference in protein:DNA ratios between cells from callipyge and normal lambs. These results suggest that muscle hypertrophy of callipyge sheep is not linked to the inherent capacity of their cultured satellite cells to proliferate, fuse or accrue protein, but hypertrophy may be linked to the influence of serum-born factors on satellite cell proliferation. Key words: Satellite cell, callipyge, sheep, cell culture
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".