MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921990781 · doi:10.1177/1947603519833148

Gene Expression Profile Is Different between Intact and Enzymatically Digested Equine Articular Cartilage

2019· article· en· W2921990781 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah I. M. Lepage, Rishi Sharma, David Dukoff, Leanne Stalker, Jon LaMarre, Thomas G. Koch

Bibliographic record

VenueCartilage · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Council
KeywordsCartilageGene expressionAggrecanHyaline cartilageExtracellular matrixCell biologyAggrecanaseRNAGeneBiologyChemistryMolecular biologyArticular cartilageAnatomyPathologyOsteoarthritisGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: RNA isolation is necessary for the evaluation of gene expression. Due to the nature of its extracellular matrix, RNA isolation from articular hyaline cartilage is difficult and thus the tissue is commonly enzymatically digested in order to extract RNA from the obtained chondrocytes. We hypothesized that the digestion process affects the expression levels of common cartilage-associated genes. Design: Expression of cartilage-associated genes was compared between intact cartilage and digested chondrocytes from weight bearing and non-weight bearing regions of the equine fetlock joint. Results: The gene expression of SOX9, COL1A2, COL2A1, ACAN, and COLX were analyzed. Digested cartilage showed a significant decrease in the expression of COL1A2, COL2A1, and ACAN compared to intact cartilage in both joint regions, and an increase in COLX expression in non-weight bearing cartilage only. Conclusions: Enzymatic digestion of cartilage significantly impacts gene expression profile. We conclude that while RNA isolation from intact cartilage is more technically difficult, determination of gene expression should be conducted on intact cartilage if true representation of the in vivo processes is sought.

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 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCartilageSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207