Phenotypic Variation of Fluoride Responses between Inbred Strains of Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Excessive systemic exposure to fluoride (F) can lead to disturbances in bone homeostasis and dental enamel development. We have previously shown strain-specific responses to F in the development of dental fluorosis (DF) and in bone formation/mineralization. The current study was undertaken to further investigate F responsive variations in bone metabolism and to determine possible relationships with DF susceptibility. Seven-week-old male mice from FVB/NJ, C57BL/6J, C3H/HeJ, A/J, 129S1/SvImJ, AKR/J, DBA/2J, and BALB/cByJ inbred strains were exposed to NaF (0 or 50 ppm as F(-)) in drinking water for 60 days. Sera were collected for F, Ca, Mg, PO(4), iPTH, sRANKL, and ALP levels. Bone marrow cells were subjected to ex vivo cell culture for osteoclast potential and CFU colony assays (CFU-fibroblast, CFU-osteoblast, CFU-erythrocyte/granulocyte/macrophage/megakaryocyte, CFU-granulocyte/macrophage, CFU-macrophage, and CFU-granulocyte). Femurs and vertebrae were subjected to micro-CT analyses, biomechanical testing, and F, Mg, and Ca content assays. DF was evaluated using quantitative fluorescence and clinical criteria. Strain-specific responses to F were observed for DF, serum studies, ex vivo cell culture studies, and bone quality. Among the strains, there were no patterns or significant correlations between DF severity and the actions of F on bone homeostasis (serum studies, ex vivo assays, or bone quality parameters). The genetic background continues to play a role in the actions of F on tooth enamel development and bone homeostasis. F exposure led to variable phenotypic responses between strains involving dental enamel development and bone metabolism.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".