Expression of fibroblast growth factor‐8 and its cognate receptors, fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR)‐3c and‐4, in fetal bovine preantral follicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Paracrine cell signaling is thought to be important for ovarian follicle development, and a role for some members of the fibroblast growth factor (FGF) family have been suggested. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that FGF-8 and its cognate receptors (FGFR-3c and FGFR-4) are expressed in bovine preantral follicles. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction was used to amplify bovine FGF-8, FGFR-3c, and FGFR-4 from preantral follicle samples and a variety of fetal and adult tissues. All three genes were widely expressed in fetal tissues, with a restricted expression pattern in adult tissues. FGF-8 and FGFR-3c were expressed in secondary follicles in 70% of fetuses examined, whereas FGFR-4 expression was significantly less frequent (20%). FGFR-3c expression frequency was significantly lower in primordial compared to secondary follicles, and FGF-8 expression showed a similar trend. FGFR-4 was only observed when all follicle classes of an individual were expressing both FGF-8 and FGFR-3c. We conclude that FGF-8 and its receptors are expressed in preantral follicles in a developmentally regulated manner.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".