Effect of Dialyzed Saliva on Human Enamel Demineralization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Saliva is supersaturated with respect to calcium and phosphate ions. Salivary ions may well play a role in the subsequent adsorption of proteins and consequently in the formation of the acquired enamel pellicle. Among several biological functions, the enamel pellicle forms a selectively permeable barrier that regulates demineralization processes. AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the importance of salivary proteins when adsorbed on enamel surface and the resultant protective effect against demineralization without the presence of salivary ions. METHODS: Enamel surfaces were coated with whole saliva, parotid saliva, dialyzed whole saliva or dialyzed parotid saliva (molecular weight cutoff 1 kDa). Adsorption was allowed to proceed for a period of 2 h. Enamel specimens were then washed with deionized water and immersed into a demineralization solution of pH 4.5 for 12 days. This solution was used to measure the amount of calcium and phosphate released from enamel specimens after the demineralization period. RESULTS: All coated specimen groups showed a significantly higher protection than those not coated with any type of saliva. In addition, undialyzed saliva (whole saliva and parotid saliva) was more effective in protecting the enamel against demineralization than dialyzed saliva. CONCLUSION: The present investigation indicates that the ionic composition of saliva can amplify the demineralization protection effect by reducing acid-induced enamel demineralization. Moreover, a protective effect of salivary proteins without presence of ions was demonstrated in this study.
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 | 0.000 | 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".