Inhibition of Notch Signaling During Mouse Incisor Renewal Leads to Enamel Defects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The continuously growing rodent incisor is an emerging model for the study of renewal of mineralized tissues by adult stem cells. Although the Bmp, Fgf, Shh, and Wnt pathways have been studied in this organ previously, relatively little is known about the role of Notch signaling during incisor renewal. Notch signaling components are expressed in enamel-forming ameloblasts and the underlying stratum intermedium (SI), which suggested distinct roles in incisor renewal and enamel mineralization. Here, we injected adult mice with inhibitory antibodies against several components of the Notch pathway. This blockade led to defects in the interaction between ameloblasts and the SI cells, which ultimately affected enamel formation. Furthermore, Notch signaling inhibition led to the downregulation of desmosome-specific proteins such as PERP and desmoplakin, consistent with the importance of desmosomes in the integrity of ameloblast-SI attachment and enamel formation. Together, our data demonstrate that Notch signaling is critical for proper enamel formation during incisor renewal, in part by regulating desmosome-specific components, and that the mouse incisor provides a model system to dissect Jag-Notch signaling mechanisms in the context of mineralized tissue renewal.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".