Cellular and Molecular Implications of Mature Adipocyte Dedifferentiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a voluminous amount of scientific literature dealing with the involvement of adipocytes in molecular regulation of carcass composition, obesity, metabolic syndrome, or diabetes. To form adipocytes (process termed adipogenesis) nearly all scientific papers refer to the use of preadipocytes, adipofibroblasts, stromal vascular cells or adipogenic cell lines, and their differentiation to form lipid-assimilating cells containing storage triacylglyceride. However, mature adipocytes, themselves, possess ability to undergo dedifferentiation, form proliferative-competent progeny cells (the exact plasticity is unknown) and reinitiate formation of cells capable of lipid metabolism and storage. The progeny cells would make a viable (and alternative) cell system for the evaluation of cell ability to reestablish lipid assimilation, ability to differentially express genes (as compared to other adipogenic cells), and to form other types of cells (multi-lineage potential). Understanding the dedifferentiation process itself and/or dedifferentiated fat cells could contribute to our knowledge of normal growth processes, or to disease function. Indeed, the ability of progeny cells to form other cell types could turn-out to be important for processes of tissue reconstruction/engineering and may have implications in clinical, biochemical or molecular processes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".