Prx1+ progenitors give rise to new articular cartilage when conditions are permissive for endogenous regeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is widely acknowledged that articular cartilage lacks the ability to regenerate. However, if such regeneration were possible, which cell type would generate new tissue? The p21 −/− mouse provides an excellent platform to explore this question, hence, we conducted lineage tracing on Paired related homeobox 1 (Prrx1/Prx1) cells post-injury to determine whether endogenous Prx1 + cells contribute to regenerated tissues post-injury. p21 −/− mice displayed enhanced endogenous cartilage regeneration, accompanied by notable differences in the number and kinetics of Prx1 + cells within and around the injury site. In p21 −/− mice, Prx1 + cells underwent chondrogenesis, ultimately contributing to the regenerated articular cartilage layer. These findings underscore the impact of tissue-resident cells on cartilage regeneration, albeit under abnormal conditions. If the conditions within the joint could be manipulated to favor such a regenerative environment, these endogenous cell types might be recruited to facilitate the formation of a new articular cartilage surface post-injury.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".