Mast Cells Are Not Essential for Pubertal Mammary Gland Branching
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Mast cells are long‐lived, tissue‐resident immune cells of the myeloid lineage with cardinal functions in allergy and atopic disease. They are now increasingly recognized also for protective roles, for example against infections and venoms. Other functions originally assigned to mast cells in development and physiology, however, have been refuted, and for yet others, the true contribution of mast cells remains uncertain. Mast cells have been implicated in promoting ductal branching in the pubertal mammary gland, the organ that produces and secretes milk in mammals, but these findings are based on mouse models that are not mast cell‐specific. In this study, we therefore re‐addressed the impact of mast cells on mammary gland branching using several complementary genetic models, including a newly generated transgenic mouse line ( Ms4a2 lsl‐hDTR ). We report that neither constitutive deficiency of mast cells, nor their conditional ablation induced at puberty affects mammary gland branching. Our results thus dispute that mast cells promote this process in mice, at least in a unique and non‐redundant manner. This study adds to a growing body of work clarifying the biological roles of mast cells and further expands the toolbox available to the field of mast cell research.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".