The Concentration, Gene Expression, and Spatial Distribution of Aggrecan in Canine Articular Cartilage, Meniscus, and Anterior and Posterior Cruciate Ligaments: A New Molecular Distinction Between Hyaline Cartilage and Fibrocartilage in the Knee Joint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concentration, spatial distribution, and gene expression of aggrecan in meniscus, articular cartilage, and the anterior and posterior cruciate ligaments (ACL and PCL) was determined in the knee joints of five mature dogs. An anti-serum against peptide sequences specific to the G1 domain of aggrecan was employed in competitive-inhibition ELISA of guanidine HCl extracts and immunofluorescence microscopy. Gene expression was determined by Taqman real-time PCR. The concentration of aggrecan in articular cartilage (240.1 +/- 32 nMol/g dry weight) was higher than that in meniscus (medial meniscus: 33.4 +/- 4.3 nMol/g) and ligaments (ACL: 6.8 +/- 0.9 nMol/g). Aggrecan was more concentrated in the inner than the outer zone of the meniscus. Aggrecan in meniscus showed an organized, spatial network, in contrast to its diffuse distribution in articular cartilage. Thus, differences in the concentration, gene expression, and spatial distribution of aggrecan constitute another molecular distinction between hyaline cartilage and fibrocartilage of the knee.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".