Chondrocyte Aggregation in Suspension Culture Is GFOGER-GPP- and β1 Integrin-dependent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Isolated chondrocytes form aggregates in suspension culture that maintain chondrocyte phenotype in a physiological pericellular environment. The molecular mechanisms involved in chondrocyte aggregation have not been previously identified. Using this novel suspension culture system, we performed mRNA and protein expression analysis along with immunohistochemistry for potential cell adhesion molecules and extracellular matrix integrin ligands. Inhibition of aggregation assays were performed using specific blocking agents. We found that: (i) direct cell-cell interactions were not involved in chondrocyte aggregation, (ii) chondrocytes in aggregates were surrounded by a matrix rich in collagen II and cartilage oligomeric protein (COMP), (iii) aggregation depends on a beta1-integrin, which binds a triple helical GFOGER sequence found in collagens, (iv) integrin alpha10-subunit is the most highly expressed alpha-subunit among those tested, including alpha5, in aggregating chondrocytes. Taken together, this body of evidence suggests that the main molecular interaction involved in aggregation of phenotypically stable chondrocytes is the alpha10beta1-collagen II interaction.
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".