Tailoring Alginate-Gelatin Hydrogels to Precisely Modulate Osteogenesis in Dental Pulp Stem Cells While Preserving Other Cellular Behaviors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alginate-gelatin (Alg-Gel) hydrogels have been used experimentally but not clinically associated with mesenchymal stromal / stem cells (MSCs) to guide bone tissue formation. One of the main challenges for its clinical application is optimizing Alg-Gel stiffness to guide osteogenesis. In this study, we investigated how Alg-Gel stiffness could modulate the dental pulp stem cell (DPSCs) attachment, morphology, proliferation, and osteogenic differentiation, identifying the optimal condition to uncouple osteogenesis from the other cell behaviors. An array of Alg-Gel hydrogels was prepared by casting different percentages of Alg and Gel being crosslinked with 2 % CaCl2. We selected two hydrogels, one with 11± 1 kPa called “low” stiffness and one with 55 ± 3 kPa called “high” stiffness. Hydrogel analyses showed that the average swelling rates were 20 ± 3% for low and 35 ± 2% for high hydrogels. The degradation percentage was 47 ± 5% and 18 ± 2% for low and high hydrogels, respectively. Both hydrogel types showed homogeneous surface shape and pro-tein (Alg-Gel) interaction with CaCl2 as assessed by FTIR-ATR and XPS. Cell culture showed good adhesion of the DPSCs to the hydrogels and proliferation. Furthermore, better osteogenic activity was obtained with high-stiffness hydrogels. In summary, this study confirms the possibility of characterizing and optimizing the stiffness of alginate-gelatin gel to guide osteogenesis in vitro without altering other cellular properties of DPSCs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.006 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".