MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159246266 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.576816

Tooth Removal in the Leopard Gecko and the de novo Formation of Replacement Teeth

2021· article· en· W3159246266 on OpenAlexafffund
Kirstin S. Brink, Joaquin I Henriquez, Theresa M. Grieco, Jesus Rodolfo Martin del Campo, Katherine Fu, Joy M. Richman

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicdental development and anomalies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam TrustsNational Institutes of HealthCentral European Institute of TechnologyMichael Smith Health Research BCBanting Research Foundation
KeywordsDental laminaDentitionBiologyAnatomyPopulationEnamel paintDentinogenesisOdontoblastDentistryPathologyMedicineDentinOdontogenic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many reptiles are able to continuously replace their teeth through life, an ability attributed to the existence of epithelial stem cells. Tooth replacement occurs in a spatially and temporally regulated manner, suggesting the involvement of diffusible factors, potentially over long distances. Here, we locally disrupted tooth replacement in the leopard gecko ( Eublepharis macularius ) and followed the recovery of the dentition. We looked at the effects on local patterning and functionally tested whether putative epithelial stem cells can give rise to multiple cell types in the enamel organs of new teeth. Second generation teeth with enamel and dentine were removed from adult geckos. The dental lamina was either left intact or disrupted in order to interfere with local patterning cues. The dentition began to reform by 1 month and was nearly recovered by 2–3 months as shown in μCT scans and eruption of teeth labeled with fluorescent markers. Microscopic analysis showed that the dental lamina was fully healed by 1 month. The deepest parts of the dental lamina retained odontogenic identity as shown by PITX2 staining. A pulse-chase was carried out to label cells that were stimulated to enter the cell cycle and then would carry BrdU forward into subsequent tooth generations. Initially we labeled 70–78% of PCNA cells with BrdU. After a 1-month chase, the percentage of BrdU + PCNA labeled cells in the dental lamina had dropped to 10%, consistent with the dilution of the label. There was also a population of single, BrdU-labeled cells present up to 2 months post surgery. These BrdU-labeled cells were almost entirely located in the dental lamina and were the likely progenitor/stem cells because they had not entered the cell cycle. In contrast fragmented BrdU was seen in the PCNA-positive, proliferating enamel organs. Homeostasis and recovery of the gecko dentition was therefore mediated by a stable population of epithelial stem cells in the dental lamina.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicdental development and anomaliesFrench-language works237,207