The in vitro production of endochondral bone from bovine periosteal explants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, periosteal tissue explants were explored as a substratum for the production of endochondral bone tissue in vitro. Endochondral bone is formed when mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) proceed through the chondrogenic lineage to produce a transitory cartilage template which eventually is ossified. The periosteum is of interest as this tissue is found enveloping long bones and has been shown to contain a resident cellular population capable of generating endochondral bone. Endochondral ossification was induced in periosteal explants through the successive application of chondrogenic and hypertrophic/osteogenic media simulating the in vivo progression of the process. Different chondrogenic and osteogenic media types were utilized in order to assess the best method for producing osseous tissue. The results indicated that endochondral bone could be produced from periosteum tissue in vitro. It was determined that chondrogenic culture with transforming growth factor β1 (TGFβ1) led to the development of immature (resting or proliferative) cartilage tissue while chondrogenic culture with bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP2) produced mature (hypertrophic or calcified) cartilage and osseous tissue. Osteogenic media generally failed to improve ossification in cartilaginous explants but did affect their progression through the endochondral process. Cartilaginous periosteum explants responded differently to osteogenic media types based on the method of chondrogenic pre-induction. Immature cartilage formed under TGFβ1 induction underwent maturation in osteogenic media with triiodothyronine (T3). Mature cartilage formed under BMP2 continued to undergo maturation in the presence of osteogenic media with BMP2 or T3. Overall, these findings suggested that BMP2 is crucial in the development of endochondral bone from periosteal explants in vitro and that the osteogenic media is unnecessary in promoting this process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".