Inner Cell Mass Localization of NANOG Precedes OCT3/4 in Rhesus Monkey Blastocysts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanism by which the inner cell mass (ICM) and trophectoderm (TE) become specified is poorly understood. Considerable species variation is evident in the expression of lineage-specific and embryonic stem cell (ESC) regulatory markers. We sought to investigate localization patterns of these markers in rhesus macaque compact morulae and blastocysts. NANOG protein was restricted to the ICM of blastocysts. In contrast to a previous report, the expression of CDX2 was detected in the primate blastocyst, localized specifically to the TE. Unlike the mouse embryo, OCT4 protein was detected using two different antibodies in both the ICM and TE. The ubiquitous pattern of OCT4 expression is consistent with observations in human, cow, and pig embryos. Significantly, lack of restricted OCT4 protein, and ICM localization of NANOG in primate blastocysts, suggests that NANOG may determine inner cell mass fate more specifically during primate development or may be less susceptible to culture artifacts. These results contrast markedly with current mechanistic hypotheses, although other factors may lie upstream of NANOG to constitute a complex interactive network. This difference may also underlie observations that regulatory mechanisms in ESC differ between mice and primates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".