Consequences for enamel development and mineralization resulting from loss of function of ameloblastin or enamelin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the nonamelogenin proteins, ameloblastin and enamelin, are both low-abundance and rapidly degrading components of forming enamel, they seem to serve essential developmental functions, as suggested by findings that an enamel layer fails to appear on teeth of mice genetically engineered to produce either a truncated form of ameloblastin (exons 5 and 6 deleted) or no enamelin at all (null). The purpose of this study was to characterize, by direct micro weighing, changes in enamel mineralization occurring on maxillary and mandibular incisors of mice bred for these alterations in nonamelogenin function (Ambn(+/+, +/-5,6, -5,6/-5,6), Enam(+/+, +/- ,-/-)). The results indicated similar changes to enamel-mineralization patterns within the altered genotypes, including significant decreases by as much as 50% in the mineral content of maturing enamel from heterozygous mice and the formation of a thin, crusty, and disorganized mineralized layer, rather than true enamel, on the labial (occlusal) surfaces of incisors and molars along with ectopic calcifications within enamel organ cells in Ambn(-5,6/-5,6) and Enam(-/-) homozygous mice. These findings confirm that both ameloblastin and enamelin are required by ameloblasts to create an enamel layer by appositional growth as well as to assist in achieving its unique high level of mineralization.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".