MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982278513 · doi:10.3390/ma12213480

3D Cultures of Salivary Gland Cells in Native or Gelled Egg Yolk Plasma, Combined with Egg White and 3D-Printing of Gelled Egg Yolk Plasma

2019· article· en· W2982278513 on OpenAlexafffund
André M. Charbonneau, Joseph M. Kinsella, Simon D. Tran

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsYolkEgg whiteSalivary glandPlasmaWhite (mutation)Materials scienceChemistryBiochemistryFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For salivary gland (SG) tissue engineering, we cultured acinar NS-SV-AC cell line or primary SG fibroblasts for 14 days in avian egg yolk plasma (EYP). Media or egg white (EW) supplemented the cultures as they grew in 3D-Cryo histology well inserts. In the second half of this manuscript, we measured EYP’s freeze-thaw gelation and freeze-thaw induced gelled EYP (GEYP), and designed and tested further GEYP tissue engineering applications. With a 3D-Cryo well insert, we tested GEYP as a structural support for 3D cell culture or as a bio-ink for 3D-Bioprinting fluorescent cells. In non-printed EYP + EW or GEYP + EW cultures, sagittal sections of the cultures showed cells remaining above the well’s base. Ki-67 expression was lacking for fibroblasts, contrasting NS-SV-AC’s constant expression. Rheological viscoelastic measurements of GEYP at 37 °C on seven different freezing periods showed constant increase from 0 in mean storage and loss moduli, to 320 Pa and 120 Pa, respectively, after 30 days. We successfully 3D-printed GEYP with controlled geometries. We manually extruded GEYP bio-ink with fluorescence cells into a 3D-Cryo well insert and showed cell positioning. The 3D-Cryo well inserts reveal information on cells in EYP and we demonstrated GEYP cell culture and 3D-printing applications.

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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations24
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207