Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Inner ear morphogenesis is tightly regulated by the temporally and spatially coordinated action of signaling ligands and their receptors. Ligand–receptor interactions are influenced by heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs), cell surface molecules that consist of glycosaminoglycan chains bound to a protein core. Diversity in the sulfation pattern within glycosaminoglycan chains creates binding sites for numerous cell signaling factors, whose activities and distribution are modified by their association with HSPGs. Results: Here we describe the expression patterns of two extracellular 6‐O‐endosulfatases, Sulf1 and Sulf2, whose activity modifies the 6‐O‐sulfation pattern of HSPGs. We use in situ hybridization to determine the temporal and spatial distribution of transcripts during the development of the chick and mouse inner ear. We also use immunocytochemistry to determine the cellular localization of Sulf1 and Sulf2 within the sensory epithelia. Furthermore, we analyze the organ of Corti in Sulf1/Sulf2 double knockout mice and describe an increase in the number of mechanosensory hair cells. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the tuning of intracellular signaling, mediated by Sulf activity, plays an important role in the development of the inner ear. Developmental Dynamics 244:168–180, 2015. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.895 | 0.745 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".