Upper jaw development in the absence of teeth: New insights for craniodental evo‐devo integration
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In p63‐null mice (p63 −/− ), teeth fail to form but the mandible forms normally; conversely, the upper jaw skeleton is malformed. Here we explored whether lack of dental tissues contributed to midfacial dysmorphologies in p63 −/− mice by testing if facial prominence defects appeared before odontogenesis failed. We also investigated gene dose effects by testing if one wild type (WT) p63 allele (p63 +/− ) was sufficient for normal upper jaw skeleton formation. We micro‐CT scanned PFA‐fixed p63 −/− , p63 +/− , and WT (p63 +/+ ) adult and embryonic mice aged E10–E14. Next, we landmarked mandibular (MdP), maxillary (MxP) and nasal prominences (NPs), and facial bones. 3D landmark data were assessed using Principal Component, Canonical Variate, Partial Least Squares, and other statistical analyses. The p63 −/− embryos showed MxP and NP malformations by E12, despite the presence of dental tissues. MdP shape was comparable among p63 −/− , p63 +/− , and p63 +/+ embryos. Upper jaw shape was comparable between p63 +/+ and p63 +/− adults. The upper jaw and its dentition both require p63 signaling, but not each other's presence, to form properly. One WT p63 allele enables normal midfacial morphogenesis; gene dose may be a target for jaw macroevolution. Jaw‐specific genetic mechanisms likely integrate the evo‐devo of dentitions with upper versus lower jaws.
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 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 it