MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417502184 · doi:10.1002/ar.70115

Role of soft tissue and bone interactions in the developmental integration and modularity of the skull in neural crest‐specific gap junction alpha‐1 knockout mice

2025· article· en· W4417502184 on OpenAlexafffund
Alyssa Moore, Madeline S. G. Tourigny, Diana Quinonez, Kevin Barr, Matthew W. Grol, Katherine E. Willmore

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Anatomical Record · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDevelopmental Biology and Gene Regulation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersRobarts Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSkullNeural crestModularity (biology)VertebrateCranial neural crestPhenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vertebrate skull is composed of bones derived from neural crest cells and mesoderm. The evolutionary capacity of the skull has been linked, in part, to the emergence of neural crest cells; however, this increased capacity for evolutionary change requires that variation within neural crest- and mesoderm-derived bones remains partly autonomous. One way to assess whether tissue origin leads to discrete patterns of variation is through measures of morphological integration and modularity. In this study, we use a neural crest-specific gap junction alpha-1 (Gja1) knockout mouse model (Cx43cKO) to determine the effect of tissue origin on skull integration and modularity. Micro-computed tomography images obtained from embryonic, newborn, and 2-month Cx43cKO and wildtype (Cx43WT) mice were used to measure and compare skull shape, size, integration, and modularity between genotypes. To determine if the phenotypic differences observed between genotypes reflect Cx43 function, mRNA expression data for markers of bone differentiation were measured from the neural crest-derived frontal bones and mesoderm-derived parietal and occipital bones. We found that patterns of integration and modularity change over development and these changes correspond with differences in Cx43 expression throughout the lifespan. Most interestingly, the patterns of developmental integration and modularity we observed at birth were influenced most greatly by tissue interactions, rather than Cx43 expression in the bones. Ultimately, our findings highlight the power of experimental models for investigating integration and modularity and the importance of tissue interactions in skull development.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Anatomical RecordSame topicDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationFrench-language works237,207