Human mesenchymal stem cell basal membrane bending on gratings is dependent on both grating width and curvature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The topography of the extracellular substrate provides physical cues to elicit specific downstream biophysical and biochemical effects in cells. An example of such a topographical substrate is periodic gratings, where the dimensions of the periodic gratings influence cell morphology and directs cell differentiation. We first develop a novel sample preparation technique using Spurr's resin to allow for cross-sectional transmission electron microscopy imaging of cells on grating grooves, and observed that the plasma membrane on the basal surface of these cells can deform and bend into grooves between the gratings. We postulate that such membrane bending is an important first step in eliciting downstream effects. Thus, we use a combination of image analysis and mathematical modeling to explain the extent of bending of basal membrane into grooves. We show that the extent to which the basal membrane bends into grooves depends on both groove width and angle of the grating ridge. Our model predicts that the basal membrane will bend into grooves when they are wider than 1.9 µm in width. The existence of such a threshold may provide an explanation for how the width of periodic gratings may bring about cellular downstream effects, such as cell proliferation or differentiation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".