Directed Assembly of Elastic Fibers via Coacervate Droplet Deposition on Electrospun Templates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elastic fibers provide critical elasticity to the arteries, lungs, and other organs. Elastic fiber assembly is a process where soluble tropoelastin is coacervated into liquid droplets, cross-linked, and deposited onto and into microfibrils. While much progress has been made in understanding the biology of this process, questions remain regarding the timing of interactions during assembly. Furthermore, it is unclear to what extent fibrous templates are needed to guide coacervate droplets into the correct architecture. The organization and shaping of coacervate droplets onto a fiber template have never been previously modeled or employed as a strategy for shaping elastin fiber materials. Using an in vitro system consisting of elastin-like polypeptides (ELPs), genipin cross-linker, electrospun polylactic- co -glycolic acid (PLGA) fibers, and tannic acid surface coatings for fibers, we explored ELP coacervation, cross-linking, and deposition onto fiber templates. We demonstrate that integration of coacervate droplets into a fibrous template is primarily influenced by two factors: (1) the balance of coacervation and cross-linking and (2) the surface energy of the fiber templates. The success of this integration affects the mechanical properties of the final fiber network. Our resulting membrane materials exhibit highly tunable morphologies and a range of elastic moduli (0.8–1.6 MPa) comparable to native elastic fibers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".