Comparison of human and mouse fetal intestinal tissues reveals differential maturation timelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Maturation of the intestinal epithelium is a necessary step for development of a fully functioning gastrointestinal tract. Studies of rodent gastrointestinal development and maturation have long been used to guide understanding of human intestinal maturation, in part because accessing human gestational stage intestinal tissues to perform equivalent human studies can be difficult. Notable differences have already been described in the timing of key stages in intestinal development between rodents and humans, but the conservation of intestinal maturation events between the two species is poorly understood. We hypothesized that species-related differences in intestinal development would alter the timing of key maturation events between human and mouse. We tested our hypothesis by performing a detailed comparison of hallmarks of intestinal maturation in human and mouse gestational intestine, including markers that describe the emergence of intestinal cell types, functionality and structural integrity. Our study demonstrates clear timing differences between maturation stages in mouse and human, with the majority of human maturation hallmarks acquired post-partum, in contrast to their gestational emergence in mouse. Our work suggests caution when translating murine intestinal maturation observations to the human, and provides a maturation road map that will be helpful to those seeking to produce mature intestine from in vitro stem cell sources.
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".