Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this issue of Biology of Reproduction, Kanatsu-Shinohara et al. [1] report a novel technique for culturing spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs) in the absence of both serum and feeder cells. This achievement has significant implications in SSC research and applications. To appreciate this study, it is useful to briefly review the past progress in the development of SSC culture systems. The study of SSCs dates back to the 1950s [2]; however, functional analyses of SSCs were limited until 1994, when the group led by Ralph Brinster demonstrated the regeneration of complete spermatogenesis following transplantation of donor mouse testis cells into recipient testes [3, 4]. Because stem cells are defined by their ability to reconstitute an adult tissue [5], this transplantation technique provided an unequivocal detection method of SSC potential. Nonetheless, the technique alone did not allow for the experimental manipulation of SSCs or for the dissection of their cellular biology. The SSC culture was therefore expected to become an important tool in understanding the mechanisms that control SSC survival, self-renewal, proliferation, and differentiation.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.010 |
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".