Naturally Occurring Periodontal Bone Loss in the Wild Deer Mouse, Genus <i>Peromyscus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Historically, animal models for the study of periodontal diseases have incorporated surgically created defects, plaque retentive ligatures, as well as soft and high-sucrose diets which may not accurately reflect progression of the natural disease. Spontaneous periodontal disease is seen in a few animal species, but these are often expensive to maintain and are unsuitable for manipulation using advanced molecular biology techniques. Mice are inexpensive, easy to maintain, and are routinely used for transgenic experiments and are therefore an optimal animal for research purposes. However, it is commonly accepted that mice do not spontaneously develop periodontal disease. The purpose of this study was to determine if a mouse population that exhibits periodontal breakdown in the wild could be found, allowing for genetic manipulation of naturally occurring periodontal disease. METHODS: We examined over 2,500 dry skulls of several Peromyscus species from various locations and habitats on the west coast of North America for periodontal bone loss in the molars, using furcation involvement as an indicator of disease severity. Alveolar bone loss was classified as Grade I) horizontal component of bone loss in the furcations; II) through-and-through furcations; and III) through-and-through furcations with alveolar bone loss into the apical third of the root. RESULTS: The proportions of individual mice experiencing bone loss were 3.8% for Class I-III involvement, 1.3% for Class II-III involvement, and 0.5% for Class III alone. Three subspecies of P. keeni and one subspecies of P. maniculatus had periodontal disease prevalences in 7% to 13.5% of their samples. Mice from isolated islands had 1.8- to 4.7-fold higher disease prevalence than those located on the mainland, with even greater prevalence on small islands. No statistically significant differences between genders were found. CONCLUSIONS: It appears that periodontal disease is far more common in this mouse genus than previously believed. Some of the subspecies demonstrated severe periodontal disease at a prevalence comparable to that found in humans.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".