Anabolic and catabolic mRNA levels of the intervertebral disc vary with the magnitude and frequency of in vivo dynamic compression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to characterize the anabolic and catabolic mRNA response of the disc to dynamic loading to determine if variations in the magnitude and/or frequency of loading could elicit different cellular responses. Sixty-eight Wistar rats were instrumented with an Ilizarov-type device spanning caudal disc 8-9. Seventy-two hours after surgery, animals were anesthetized and loaded at either 1 or 0.2 MPa at a frequency of 1, 0.2 or 0.01 Hz for 2 h (6 groups). The surgical control (Sham) animals underwent anesthesia with no loading. Loaded (c8-9) and internal-control discs (c6-7 and c10-11) were dissected and annulus and nucleus tissue were separately analyzed by real-time RT-PCR for levels of anabolic (collagen-1A1, collagen-2A1, aggrecan) and catabolic (MMP-3, MMP-13, ADAMTs-4) mRNA. In the nucleus, a frequency-dependent response was seen at 1 MPa with anabolic genes stimulated at 0.01 Hz and catabolic genes at 1 Hz. In the annulus all frequencies resulted in significant up-regulation of catabolic mRNA at 1 MPa loading. In general loading at 0.2 MPa or 0.2 Hz had little effect on gene expression. The results suggest that gene expression of the annulus appears to be more dependent on the magnitude of applied stress, while the nucleus is both magnitude- and frequency-dependent.
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".