Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The human secondary palate forms between 6-12 weeks of gestation. There has been controversy as to whether palatal shelves in the soft palate join by fusion similar to the hard palate, or whether merging and proliferation of the mesenchyme at the posterior edge of the developing hard palate is the mechanism. The purpose of this study is to examine the mode of soft palate closure in a more representative sample than was used in the single previous study on which all textbooks are based. Methods: Serial sections of secondary palates from 13 human fetuses from 54-74-days of development post conception were stained, photographed and imported into WinSurf 3D software. Anatomical structures were traced including the palatal shelves, midline epithelial seam and palatine aponeurosis, the images aligned and then stacked to create a 3D representation. Results: We analyzed the following numbers of specimens: 54-days-2; 57-days-4; 59 days -2; 64-days-1; 67-days-1; 70-days–2; 74-days-1. At 54-days, a midline seam is present close to the hard palate but more posteriorly the soft palate is open. Between 57 and 59 days a thick midline seam is observed throughout the soft palate. There is some variability between specimens such that the soft palate was closed early in one 59 day specimen and open in a 67-day specimen. One 70-day specimen had no seam whereas the other retained the seam. By 74-days the specimen had complete soft palate union with the presence of a continuous palatine aponeurosis. Overall, our sample included a total of 7 fetuses with a midline seam in the soft palate. Conclusions: The formation of a bilayered epithelial seam followed by breakdown of the seam and mesenchymal fusion is the primary mode of soft palate formation in humans. Epithelial seam removal is rapid and could explain why a seam was not observed in earlier studies.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".