The mechanoresponse of bone is closely related to the osteocyte lacunocanalicular network architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organisms rely on mechanosensing mechanisms to adapt to changes in their mechanical environment. Fluid-filled network structures not only ensure efficient transport but can also be employed for mechanosensation. The lacunocanalicular network (LCN) is a fluid-filled network structure, which pervades our bones and accommodates a cell network of osteocytes. For the mechanism of mechanosensation, it was hypothesized that load-induced fluid flow results in forces that can be sensed by the cells. We use a controlled in vivo loading experiment on murine tibiae to test this hypothesis, whereby the mechanoresponse was quantified experimentally by in vivo micro-computed tomography (µCT) in terms of formed and resorbed bone volume. By imaging the LCN using confocal microscopy in bone volumes covering the entire cross-section of mouse tibiae and by calculating the fluid flow in the three-dimensional (3D) network, we could perform a direct comparison between predictions based on fluid flow velocity and the experimentally measured mechanoresponse. While local strain distributions estimated by finite-element analysis incorrectly predicts preferred bone formation on the periosteal surface, we demonstrate that additional consideration of the LCN architecture not only corrects this erroneous bias in the prediction but also explains observed differences in the mechanosensitivity between the three investigated mice. We also identified the presence of vascular channels as an important mechanism to locally reduce fluid flow. Flow velocities increased for a convergent network structure where all of the flow is channeled into fewer canaliculi. We conclude that, besides mechanical loading, LCN architecture should be considered as a key determinant of bone adaptation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".