Enzymatic Digestion Technique Influences Regulatory Volume Decrease of Isolated Bovine Chondrocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cell volume regulation has been observed in almost all cell types examined to date. When cells are exposed to hypotonic solutions a quick increase in volume is followed by a more gradual return, termed regulatory volume decrease (RVD). The mechanism associated with RVD depends upon cell type and species, but in bovine chondrocytes the non-selective osmolyte channels are mainly responsible [1]. In a chondrocyte, volume control is critical for the maintenance of metabolism, and biosynthesis. Volume fluctuations can be due to changes in hydrostatic pressure, fluid flows, deformation, and extracellular matrix (ECM) hydration. Alterations in hydration can occur during static loading of articular cartilage or during the early stages of osteoarthritis [1], which have been correlated with changes in cellular metabolism. The swelling behaviour of chondrocytes, and the mechanism by which they sense and respond to changes in their physico-chemical environment, are not well understood [1]. To investigate the effects of osmotic environment on chondrocyte behaviour it is often beneficial to isolate cells from the ECM, which can be achieved by a variety of techniques. To investigate the effect of isolation technique on the swelling behaviour of bovine chondrocytes, two enzymatic digestion techniques were chosen for this study.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".