MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231509365 · doi:10.1017/s0021878201007671

The cells of the rabbit meniscus: their arrangement, interrelationship, morphological variations and cytoarchitecture

2000· article· en· W4231509365 on OpenAlexaff
Marie‐Pierre Hellio Le Graverand, YONGCHUNG OU, TERESA SCHIELD‐YEE, Leona Barclay, David A. Hart, TAKASHI NATSUME, J. B. Rattner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Anatomy · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibrocartilageMeniscusCytoarchitectureAnatomyCell typeBiologyCell biologyLateral meniscusConnexinCytoplasmHyalineCytoskeletonCellGap junctionPathologyOsteoarthritisMedicineArticular cartilageOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four major morphologically distinct classes of cells were identified within the adult rabbit meniscus using antibodies to cytoskeletal proteins. Two classes of cell were present in the fibrocartilage region of the meniscus. These meniscal cells exhibited long cellular processes that extended from the cell body. A third cell type found in the inner hyaline-like region of the meniscus had a rounded form and lacked projections. A fourth cell type with a fusiform shape and no cytoplasmic projections was found along the superficial regions of the meniscus. Using a monoclonal antibody to connexin 43, numerous gap junctions were observed in the fibrocartilage region, whereas none were seen in cells either from the hyaline-like or the superficial zones of the meniscus. The majority of the cells within the meniscus exhibited other specific features such as primary cilia and 2 centrosomes. The placement of the meniscal cell subtypes as well as their morphology and architecture support the supposition that their specific characteristics underlie the ability of the meniscus to respond to different types of environmental mechanical loads.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AnatomySame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207