MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768032712 · doi:10.1038/s41526-017-0032-x

Coculture of meniscus cells and mesenchymal stem cells in simulated microgravity

2017· article· en· W2768032712 on OpenAlexafffund
William Weiss, Aillette Mulet‐Sierra, Melanie Kunze, Nadr M. Jomha, Adetola B. Adesida

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Microgravity · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpaceflight effects on biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of AlbertaUniversity of AlbertaIntegra LifeSciences
KeywordsMesenchymal stem cellMeniscusCell biologyStem cellChemistryBiologyPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Simulated microgravity has been shown to enhance cartilaginous matrix formation by chondrocytes and chondrogenesis of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). Similarly, coculture of primary chondrocytes with MSCs has been shown as a strategy to simultaneously retain the differentiated phenotype of chondrocytes and enhance cartilaginous matrix formation. In this study, we investigated the effect of simulated microgravity on cocultures of primary human meniscus cells and adipose-derived MSCs. We used biochemical, qPCR, and immunofluorescence assays to conduct our investigation. Simulated microgravity significantly enhanced cartilaginous matrix formation in cocultures of primary meniscus cells and adipose-derived MSCs. The enhancement was accompanied by increased hypertrophic differentiation markers,COL10A1andMMP-13, and suppression of hypertrophic differentiation inhibitor, gremlin 1 (GREM1).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj MicrogravitySame topicSpaceflight effects on biologyFrench-language works237,207