Cell dissociation experiments reveal that positional information operates in the chicken frontonasal mass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we examined the role of cell-cell affinity in patterning the avian frontonasal mass-the facial prominence that forms the prenasal cartilage and premaxillary bone. Reconstituted cell pellets derived from undifferentiated, frontonasal mass mesenchyme were recombined with facial epithelium and grafted to host embryos to continue development. We determined that the cells reestablished a recognizable frontonasal mass pattern and were able to induce egg teeth in overlying ectoderm. Further analysis revealed there were region-specific differences in the cartilage patterns such that central recombinations were more likely to form a straight cartilage rod, whereas lateral mesenchyme pellets were more likely to form complex, branched cartilage patterns. The basis for the pattern differences was that central mesenchyme cells showed preferential clustering in the cartilage condensations in the center of the graft, whereas lateral cells were spread throughout as determined by dye labeling and quail chicken chimeras. The disruption of cell contacts temporarily delayed onset of gene expression but by 48 h both Msx2 and Dlx5 were expressed. Msx2, in particular, had very clear edges to the expression domains and often the pattern of expression correlated with type of cartilage morphology. Together, these data suggest that an important patterning mechanism in the face is the ability of mesenchymal cells to sort out according to position and that Msx2 may help repress chondrogenic potential in the lateral frontonasal mass.
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) | 0.002 | 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".