Can the contralateral limb be used as a control during the growing period in a rodent model?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The contralateral limb is often used as a control in various clinical, forensic and anthropological studies. However, no studies have been performed to determine if the contra-lateral limb is a suitable control during the bone development period. The aim of this study was to determine the bilateral symmetry of growing rat tibiae in terms of geometric shape, mechanical strength and bone morphological parameters with developmental stages. Left and right tibias of 18 male Sprague-Dawley rats at 4, 8 and 12 weeks of age were scanned with micro-CT for bone-morphometric evaluation and for 3D deviation analysis to quantify the geometric shape variations between left and right tibiae. Overall tibial lengths and curvatures were also measured, and bone mechanical strength was investigated using three-point bending tests. Deviation distributions between bilateral tibiae remained below 0.5 mm for more than 80% of the geometry for all groups. Tibial lengths, longitudinal tibial curvatures, bone-morphometric parameters and mechanical strengths changed significantly during the growing period but kept a strong degree of symmetry between bilateral tibiae. These results suggest that bilateral tibiae can be considered symmetrical in nature and that contralateral limb can be used as a control during the growing period in different experimental scenarios.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".