Myotube Formation is Delayed but not Prevented in MyoD-deficient Skeletal Muscle: Studies in Regenerating Whole Muscle Grafts of Adult Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared the time course of myogenic events in vivo in regenerating whole muscle grafts in MyoD(-/-) and control BALB/c adult mice using immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy. Immunohistochemistry with antibodies to desmin and myosin revealed a striking delay by about 3 days in the formation of myotubes in MyoD(-/-) autografts compared with BALB/c mice. However, myotube formation was not prevented, and autografts in both strains appeared similar by 8 days. Electron microscopy confirmed myotube formation in 8- but not 5-day MyoD(-/-) grafts. This pattern was not influenced by cross-transplantation experiments between strains examined at 5 days. Antibodies to proliferating cell nuclear antigen demonstrated an elevated level of replication by MyoD(-/-) myoblasts in autografts, and replication was sustained for about 3 days compared with controls. These data indicate that the delay in the onset of differentiation and hence fusion is related to extended proliferation of the MyoD(-/-) myoblasts. Overall, although muscle regeneration was delayed it was not impaired in MyoD(-/-) mice in this model.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".