Scanning and Transmission Electron-Microscopic Studies on the Lingual Tonsil of the Buffalo (Bubalus bubalis)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examined lingual tonsil of six buffaloes of the local mixed breed by scanning and transmission electron-microscopy to elucidate their ultrastructural features. The lingual tonsil presented folded mucosa having longitudinally oriented folds which were separated by grooves. The surface mucosa showed a squamous arrangement of cells which delineated from the adjacent cells. The surface of these cells at a higher magnification presented the microplicae of different arrangements which were mainly of closed pattern type and resembled fingerprints of humans. The luminal openings of glandular ducts on the free surface presented varying shapes. The transmission electron-microscopy described ultrastructural details of the different strata of the stratified squamous keratinised, non-keratinised and reticular epithelia. The propria-submucosa contain reticular cells, fibroblast, lymphoid cells, plasma cells, granulocytes and interdigitating cells. Few high endothelial venules observed and the cytoplasmic process of these endothelial cells contained small vacuoles equivalent to vesiculo-vacuolar organelles, membrane-bound bodies and vacuolated structures.
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) | 0.002 | 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".