MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214758978 · doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2022.02.024

Bone mineral organization at the mesoscale: A review of mineral ellipsoids in bone and at bone interfaces

2022· review· en· W4214758978 on OpenAlexafffund
Chiara Micheletti, Ariana L. Hurley, Aurélien Gourrier, Anders Palmquist, Tengteng Tang, Furqan A. Shah, Kathryn Grandfield

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Biomaterialia · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMitacsIngaBritt och Arne Lundbergs ForskningsstiftelseStiftelsen Handlanden Hjalmar SvenssonsSwedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher EducationVetenskapsrådetHuman Frontier Science ProgramNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDoktor Felix Neuberghs StiftelseOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceCanada Research ChairsKungl. Vetenskaps- och Vitterhets-Samhället i Göteborg
KeywordsMaterials scienceBone mineralMicroscale chemistryMineralization (soil science)Bone matrixBiomedical engineeringFibrilNanotechnologyComposite materialBiophysicsAnatomyChemistryOsteoporosisBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Much debate still revolves around bone architecture, especially at the nano- and microscale. Bone is a remarkable material where high strength and toughness coexist thanks to an optimized composition of mineral and protein and their hierarchical organization across several distinct length scales. At the nanoscale, mineralized collagen fibrils act as building block units. Despite their key role in biological and mechanical functions, the mechanisms of collagen mineralization and the precise arrangement of the organic and inorganic constituents in the fibrils remains not fully elucidated. Advances in three-dimensional (3D) characterization of mineralized bone tissue by focused ion beam-scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM) revealed mineral-rich regions geometrically approximated as prolate ellipsoids, much larger than single collagen fibrils. These structures have yet to become prominently recognized, studied, or adopted into biomechanical models of bone. However, they closely resemble the circular to elliptical features previously identified by scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) in two-dimensions (2D). Herein, we review the presence of mineral ellipsoids in bone as observed with electron-based imaging techniques in both 2D and 3D with particular focus on different species, anatomical locations, and in proximity to natural and synthetic biomaterial interfaces. This review reveals that mineral ellipsoids are a ubiquitous structure in all the bones and bone-implant interfaces analyzed. This largely overlooked hierarchical level is expected to bring different perspectives to our understanding of bone mineralization and mechanical properties, in turn shedding light on structure-function relationships in bone. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: In bone, the hierarchical organization of organic (mainly collagen type I) and inorganic (calcium-phosphate mineral) components across several length scales contributes to a unique combination of strength and toughness. However, aspects related to the collagen-mineral organization and to mineralization mechanisms remain unclear. Here, we review the presence of mineral prolate ellipsoids across a variety of species, anatomical locations, and interfaces, both natural and with synthetic biomaterials. These mineral ellipsoids represent a largely unstudied feature in the organization of bone at the mesoscale, i.e., at a level connecting nano- and microscale. Thorough understanding of their origin, development, and structure can provide valuable insights into bone architecture and mineralization, assisting the treatment of bone diseases and the design of bio-inspired materials.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations64
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa BiomaterialiaSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207