Tooth germ initiation patterns in a developing dentition: An in vivo study of <i>Xenopus laevis</i> tadpoles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transparency of soft tissue in Xenopus laevis tadpoles and the anterior-posterior orientation of their developing tooth germs in the upper jaw offer a unique opportunity for the in vivo charting of the first 15-20 days of the developing dentition. Twenty-two X. laevis tadpoles were anesthetized daily and their mouths opened to record the first appearance, position, and development of tooth germs in the upper jaw. The initiation patterns revealed considerable variability between animals, and even between the jaw quadrants in the same animal. This variability appears within a structural boundary and the results are consistent with the presence of an odontogenic band. The final length of dental rows far exceeded the jaw growth for each quadrant during the recording period. This in vivo investigation underlines the limits of cross-sectional studies, and in particular the assumption that tooth germs initiate at the same position in the dental row. The tooth germ initiation patterns in this study did not align with the predictions of standard models for the development of the dentition-Zahnreihen, Clone, and New Progress Zone theories.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".