Not all cartilages are the same! Differential effects in the cranial vs caudal skeleton after BMP inhibition in zebrafish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several signaling factors are known to be involved in cartilage morphogenesis via the regulation of condensation size, shape, and location. Of these signaling factors, the bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) are known to be crucial in regulating the formation of condensations, cellular differentiation, and in the expression of the downstream transcription factors. Furthermore, interference with the BMP signaling pathway results in disrupted bone and cartilage development in various vertebrates. This study aims to elucidate the effects of BMP inhibition on cartilage morphology in the zebrafish. We utilise a pharmaceutical BMP pathway inhibitor at specific early time points of development. We focus on two cartilages, one cranial and one caudal, that develop concurrently but which have different developmental origins. Our data shows that the cranial cartilage, namely the scleral cartilage, is highly robust and unaffected by the BMP inhibitor. This is in stark contrast to the caudal cartilages, for example the hypurals, which are dramatically affected. These effects include fusion of elements, missing elements and altered morphology. Understanding these variable effects provides insight into the mechanisms that limit versus enable cartilages from altering their shape and/or size. The robustness of the cranial skeleton is particularly noteworthy given the multitude of disorders that affect this part of the skeleton. Support or Funding Information Funding was provided by the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".