MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

High resolution ultrastructural reevaluation of dental cuticle in monkey tooth

2001· article· en· W2032964346 on OpenAlexaff
Takashi Sawada, Sadayuki Inoué

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Periodontal Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLamina densaBasement membraneLamina lucidaJunctional epitheliumAnatomyDental laminaUltrastructureCuticle (hair)ChemistryEpitheliumElectron microscopeBiologyPathologyMedicineBasal laminaOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study the detailed ultrastructure of the dental cuticle at the dentogingival border in monkeys (macaques) was observed. The deciduous molars and permanent premolars with associated gingiva were prepared for thin section electron microscopy. The dental cuticle, seen as a dense amorphous, usually unlaminated layer, was localized between the tooth enamel and the junctional epithelium of the gingiva in close association with the internal basement membrane of the junctional epithelium. High resolution electron microscopy showed that its basic structure was a fine network of irregular anastomosing strands identified as the cord network of the basement membrane which was continuous with that of the lamina densa of the internal basement membrane of the junctional epithelium. In the cuticle. openings of most of the network were filled with a dark amorphous material. These observations suggest that an additional layer of a cord network formed from the basement membrane components, which is probably secreted by the cells of the junctional epithelium during formation of the cuticle, is added to the cord network of the lamina densa of the basement membrane. In addition, a dark amorphous material is deposited within the newly added cord network at the enamel side of the basement membrane. The origin of this dark material still remains to be clarified, but the possibility is that it originates, as has previously been suggested, from either serum protein in gingival exudate or from hemoglobin produced by the degradation of red blood cells.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Periodontal ResearchSame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207