Hydrocortisone treatment as a tool to study conjunctival placode induction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Conjunctival placodes are a series of placodes that develop into the conjunctival (scleral) papillae and ultimately induce a series of scleral ossicles in the eyes of many vertebrates. This study establishes a hydrocortisone injection procedure (incl. dosage) that consistently inhibits all conjunctival papillae in the embryonic chicken eye. The effects of this hydrocortisone treatment on apoptosis, vasculature, and placode-related gene expression were assessed. RESULTS: Hydrocortisone treatment does not increase apoptotic cell death or have a major effect on the ciliary artery or vascular plexus in the eye. β-catenin and Eda expression levels were not significantly altered following hydrocortisone treatment, despite the absence of conjunctival papillae. Notably, Fgf20 expression was significantly reduced following hydrocortisone treatment, and the distribution of β-catenin was altered. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that conjunctival papillae induction begins as early as HH27.5 (E5.5). Hydrocortisone treatment reduces Fgf20 expression independently of β-catenin and Eda and may instead affect other members of the Wnt/β-catenin or Eda/Edar pathways, or it may affect the ability of morphogens to diffuse through the extracellular matrix. This study contributes to a growing profile of gene expression data during placode development and enhances our understanding of how some vertebrate eyes develop these fascinating bones.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".