Unicuspid and bicuspid tooth crown formation in squamates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The molecular and developmental factors that regulate tooth morphogenesis in nonmammalian species, such as snakes and lizards, have received relatively little attention compared to mammals. Here we describe the development of unicuspid and bicuspid teeth in squamate species. The simple, cone-shaped tooth crown of the bearded dragon and ball python is established at cap stage and fixed in shape by the differentiation of cells and the secretion of dental matrices. Enamel production, as demonstrated by amelogenin expression, occurs relatively earlier in squamate teeth than in mouse molars. We suggest that the early differentiation in squamate unicuspid teeth at cap stage correlates with a more rudimentary tooth crown shape. The leopard gecko can form a bicuspid tooth crown despite the early onset of differentiation. Cusp formation in the gecko does not occur by the folding of the inner enamel epithelium, as in the mouse molar, but by the differential secretion of enamel. Ameloblasts forming the enamel epithelial bulge, a central swelling of cells in the inner enamel epithelium, secrete amelogenin at cap stage, but cease to do so by bell stage. Meanwhile, other ameloblasts in the inner enamel epithelium continue to secrete enamel, forming cusp tips on either side of the bulge. Bulge cells specifically express the gene Bmp2, which we suggest serves as a pro-differentiation signal for cells of the gecko enamel organ. In this regard, the enamel epithelial bulge of the gecko may be more functionally analogous to the secondary enamel knot of mammals than the primary enamel knot.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".