MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Examining the Correlation Between Cellular and Gross Morphological Changes In the Developing Mouse Skull

2018· article· en· W3173713722 on OpenAlexafffund
Sommer G.E. Jarvis, Jae Eun Lee, Gregory M. Kelly, Katherine E. Willmore

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicConnexins and lens biology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEndochondral ossificationSkullIntramembranous ossificationOsteoblastAnatomyBiologyChondrocyteCraniofacialCell biologyPathologyCartilageGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION The mammalian skull develops from intramembranous and endochondral ossification. Thus, differentiation and proliferation of osteoblasts and chondrocytes play an integral role in skull development and the resulting morphology. While this connection between cellular behaviour and morphology is intuitive, the relationship between changes at the cellular level and gross phenotypic changes in the skull are still poorly understood. In this study we ask: How do changes in osteoblast and chondrocyte differentiation and proliferation within facial sutures and cranial base synchondroses affect the gross morphology of the mouse skull? We use a mutant mouse model (Cx43 I130T/+ ) wherein the GJA1 gene encoding for the gap junctional protein Connexin43 has been mutated, reducing gap junctional conductance by 50%. Cx43 is critical in bone development, and is known to stimulate osteoblast differentiation. Presently, the literature is vague surrounding the effects of Cx43 on chondrocytes. Cx43 I130T/+ mice display craniofacial anomalies, such as smaller facial bones, elongated nasal cartilages and microcephaly. Preliminary data from our lab shows that the cranial base is also altered in Cx43 I130T/+ adult mice. We predict that these morphological changes in the face and cranial base will be mirrored by altered cellular behaviour in the facial sutures and cranial base synchondroses. METHODS Skulls of P0 Cx43 I130T/+ mice and their wildtype (WT) littermates were imaged using μ‐CT. Three‐dimensional landmarks were collected from scans and differences in shape were analyzed using geometric morphometrics. Paraffin sections were taken from skulls of each genotype and stained for histomorphometry and markers of cell proliferation and osteoblast and chondrocyte differentiation. Measures of cell density were collected for facial sutures and cranial base synchondroses and compared between groups. RESULTS While we found no significant differences in skull size between genotypes, we did find significant shape differences. Mutant mice have proportionately smaller facial bones and orbits and relatively larger basicrania compared to WT mice. Mutant skulls are also severely under‐mineralized. There is no difference in osterix‐positive cell density in facial sutures between groups, but we did find an altered pattern of osteocalcin expression in mutant facial sutures. Total area of each synchondrosis is similar for both genotypes, but there are significant differences in resting zone area of each synchondrosis between groups. Cell density of Sox9‐positive cells within the synchondroses are the same for mutant and WT mice. CONCLUSIONS Our shape analyses indicate that the morphological changes observed in adult Cx43 I130T/+ mice are present at birth. While we did find some differences in osteoblast and chondrocyte profiles between groups, the link between cellular changes at the tissue level and gross phenotypic changes is not straightforward. Support or Funding Information This work is supported by NSERC. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicConnexins and lens biologyFrench-language works237,207