The role of fetal breathing-like movements in lung organogenesis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this review the recent findings concerning the role of fetal breathing-like movements (FBMs) on lung organogenesis are discussed. We first review the consequences that the lack of FBMs has on lung organogenesis and then we discuss the possible pathways that may be employed in this process. Specifically, we review the data in support of the notion that FBMs are required for the cell cycle kinetics regulation (i.e., cell proliferation and cell death) via the expression of growth factors, such as platelet derived growth factors (PDGFs) and insulin growth factors (IGFs), and thyroid transcription factor 1 (TTF-1). Moreover, the role of FBMs on biochemical differentiation of Clara cells, type I and type II pneumocytes is reviewed. Interestingly, even though type II pneumocytes are able to synthesize surfactant-associated proteins (SPs), in the complete absence of FBMs, they are unable to compile, store and release the surfactant. Similarly, in spite of the expression of some early differentiation markers, in the absence of FBMs, type I pneumocytes are unable to flatten in order to allow the gas exchange in the lung. In fact, we are currently employing the cDNA microarray analysis in search for the molecules that might be specific for the lacking functions in pneumocytes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".