MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803538880 · doi:10.1089/scd.2017.0266

Long-Term Effects of Simulated Microgravity and Vibration Exposure on Skeletal Development in Zebrafish

2018· article· en· W2803538880 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueStem Cells and Development · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpaceflight effects on biology
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsBiologyAnatomyAxial skeletonSkeleton (computer programming)ZebrafishOssificationVertebra

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most studies utilizing fish to study the effects of simulated microgravity (SMG) only observe the effects during the first week of development. They also do not take into account the potential impact on development of vibrations caused by the equipment. In this study we analyze the effects of both SMG and vibration on development of the skeleton. We analyze three different exposure durations and starting points that coincide with cranial neural crest cell migration. We use a combination of bone staining and morphometrics to analyze the effects. Our data show that both vibration and SMG affect vertebra number and body size; however, not all vertebrae are equally affected by each treatment. We also show that delayed ossification manifests during development, particularly after SMG exposure, and this translates into buckled and bent bones in adults. This study highlights the large impact of even very short exposure periods when they coincide with critical time points of development.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.231 · 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