MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394726918 · doi:10.1242/dev.202371

Apical expansion of calvarial osteoblasts and suture patency is dependent on fibronectin cues

2024· article· en· W4394726918 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaotian Feng, Helen Molteni, Megan Gregory, Jennifer Lanza, Nikaya Polsani, I. Gupta, Rachel H. Wyetzner, M. Brent Hawkins, Greg Holmes, Sevan Hopyan, Matthew P. Harris, Radhika P. Atit

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCraniofacial Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchCase Western Reserve University
KeywordsCalvariaCraniosynostosisBiologyCoronal sutureSkullOsteoblastMesenchymeFibronectinCranial vaultCell biologyAnatomyFibrous jointGeneticsEmbryoExtracellular matrix

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The skull roof, or calvaria, is comprised of interlocking plates of bones that encase the brain. Separating these bones are fibrous sutures that permit growth. Currently, we do not understand the instructions for directional growth of the calvaria, a process which is error-prone and can lead to skeletal deficiencies or premature suture fusion (craniosynostosis, CS). Here, we identify graded expression of fibronectin (FN1) in the mouse embryonic cranial mesenchyme (CM) that precedes the apical expansion of calvaria. Conditional deletion of Fn1 or Wasl leads to diminished frontal bone expansion by altering cell shape and focal actin enrichment, respectively, suggesting defective migration of calvarial progenitors. Interestingly, Fn1 mutants have premature fusion of coronal sutures. Consistently, syndromic forms of CS in humans exhibit dysregulated FN1 expression, and we also find FN1 expression altered in a mouse CS model of Apert syndrome. These data support a model of FN1 as a directional substrate for calvarial osteoblast migration that may be a common mechanism underlying many cranial disorders of disparate genetic etiologies.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.241
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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmentSame topicCraniofacial Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207