Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27557870›Full record

ArticleJournal of anatomy2016

Ultrastructural and developmental features of the tessellated endoskeleton of elasmobranchs (sharks and rays).

Ronald Seidel, Kady Lyons, Michael Blumer, Paul Zaslansky, Peter Fratzl, James C Weaver, Mason N Dean

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of anatomy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A Bio-Inspired Perspective on Materials Sustainability.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Growth of a Tessellation: Geometric rules for the Development of Stingray Skeletal Patterns.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  9. Comparative Morphology of Skeletal Development inAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ronald SeidelDepartment Biomaterials, Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces, Potsdam, Germany. ronald.seidel@mpikg.mpg.de.
Kady LyonsDepartment of Biological Sciences, California State University Long Beach, Long Beach, CA, USA.
Michael BlumerDivision of Clinical and Functional Anatomy, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Paul ZaslanskyJulius Wolff Institute, Berlin-Brandenburg Center for Regenerative Therapies (BCRT), Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Peter FratzlDepartment Biomaterials, Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces, Potsdam, Germany.
James C WeaverWyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Mason N DeanDepartment Biomaterials, Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces, Potsdam, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The endoskeleton of elasmobranchs (sharks and rays) is comprised largely of unmineralized cartilage, differing fundamentally from the bony skeletons of other vertebrates. Elasmobranch skeletons are further distinguished by a tessellated surface mineralization, a layer of minute, polygonal, mineralized tiles called tesserae. This 'tessellation' has defined the elasmobranch group for more than 400 million years, yet the limited data on development and ultrastructure of elasmobranch skeletons (e.g. how tesserae change in shape and mineral density with age) have restricted our abilities to develop hypotheses for tessellated cartilage growth. Using high-resolution, two-dimensional and three-dimensional materials and structural characterization techniques, we investigate an ontogenetic series of tessellated cartilage from round stingray Urobatis halleri, allowing us to define a series of distinct phases for skeletal mineralization and previously unrecognized features of tesseral anatomy. We show that the distinct tiled morphology of elasmobranch calcified cartilage is established early in U. halleri development, with tesserae forming first in histotroph embryos as isolated, globular islets of mineralized tissue. By the sub-adult stage, tesserae have increased in size and grown into contact with one another. The intertesseral contact results in the formation of more geometric (straight-edged) tesseral shapes and the development of two important features of tesseral anatomy, which we describe here for the first time. The first, the intertesseral joint, where neighboring tesserae abut without appreciable overlapping or interlocking, is far more complex than previously realized, comprised of a convoluted bearing surface surrounded by areas of fibrous attachment. The second, tesseral spokes, are lamellated, high-mineral density features radiating outward, like spokes on a wheel, from the center of each tessera to its joints with its neighbors, likely acting as structural reinforcements of the articulations between tesserae. As tesserae increase in size during ontogeny, spokes are lengthened via the addition of new lamellae, resulting in a visually striking mineralization pattern in the larger tesserae of older adult skeletons when viewed with scanning electron microscopy (SEM) in backscatter mode. Backscatter SEM also revealed that the cell lacunae in the center of larger tesserae are often filled with high mineral density material, suggesting that when intratesseral cells die, cell-regulated inhibition of mineralization is interrupted. Many of the defining ultrastructural details we describe relate to local variation in tissue mineral density and support previously proposed accretive growth mechanisms for tesserae. High-resolution micro-computed tomography data indicate that some tesseral anatomical features we describe for U. halleri are common among species of all major elasmobranch groups despite large variation in tesseral shape and size. We discuss hypotheses about how these features develop, and compare them with other vertebrate skeletal tissue types and their growth mechanisms.

Indexed as

AnimalsCalcification, PhysiologicCartilageImaging, Three-DimensionalMicroscopy, ElectronSharksSkates, FishX-Ray Microtomographycalcified cartilagedevelopmentelasmobranchsskeletontesseraeultrastructure

Identifiers

PMID27557870
PMCPMC5055090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.