Communication between paired chondrocytes in the superficial zone of articular cartilage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The regeneration and repair of cartilage damaged by injury or disease, a major goal of orthopaedic science, depends on understanding the structure and function of both the extracellular matrix and the chondrocytes. In this study, we explored the in situ organization and potential interactions between chondrocytes in the superficial zone of adult rabbit articular cartilage. Some chondrocytes in this zone were observed close together and appeared to be paired whereas others were solitary. The shared surfaces of a chondrocyte pair were separated by a narrow plate of extracellular matrix, into which extended small cytoplasmic projections from both cells. Furthermore, the spatial distribution of major cellular landmarks, such as the nucleus and centrosome as well as some intracellular proteins such as connexin-43, tended to be mirrored about this matrix plate. Fluorescence recovery after photobleaching revealed the fluorescent dye calcein-AM dye can pass between paired cells, and that the passage of this dye can be inhibited by the gap junction blocker octanol. These results illustrate that rapid cellular communication is possible between cells in the superficial layer of adult articular cartilage, which challenges the current thinking that these chondrocytes function in isolation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".