Curiouser and Curiouser: The Evolving Story of the Mechanisms Involved in Puberty
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Sometimes, like a giant jigsaw puzzle, concepts in endocrinology take time to develop, to form a coherent picture of how endocrine systems are integrated to support physiological responses. Such, it can be argued, has been the case with respect to our understanding of the mechanisms underlying puberty. For more than 50 years, it has been known that mammals experience a period of agonadal restraint during development, in which reproductive function is held in check (1). As puberty approaches, this restraint is switched off and pulsatile GnRH secretion is activated. What caused the juvenile period to end remained a matter of conjecture, although a shift in steroid feedback was suggested by observations showing that immature rats had enhanced sensitivity to the negative feedback effects of estradiol (2), whereas the onset of ovarian cyclicity could be advanced by prepubertal injections of estradiol (3). In the past 5 decades, several other important pieces of the puzzle have been filled in. The brain was itself found to be a site of gonadal steroid synthesis (4, 5). Data emerged to indicate that neurosteroid synthesis might contribute to reproductive function (6). Dramatic advances were made in understanding the neurotransmitter and neuropeptide circuitry responsible for regulating the onset of reproductive function, in particular the kisspeptin system (7, 8). However, what actually triggered the change in feedback control of gonadotrophin secretion at puberty remained obscure. A shift from a predominantly inhibitoryhypothalamic environment toone inwhichexcitatory neurotransmitters activated the GnRH neurons was believed to occur (9, 10), but what caused this shift remained unknown. In the current issue of Endocrinology, Kenealy et al (11) develop the novel idea that in female primates, the control of GnRH secretion before and during puberty may actually operate in a relatively similar hypothalamic steroidal milieu: only the source of the estradiol is different. To determine hypothalamic steroid concentrations, perfusates were collected in vivo from the stalk-median eminence (S-ME) region of 32 female rhesus monkeys at different stages of prepubertal and pubertal development. The samples were assayed for estradiol, estrone, testosterone, androstenedione, and progesterone, using a sensitive and specific liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry-based method. Concomitantly, GnRH in the perfusates, as well as LH and steroid levels in circulating serum samples from the same animals, were also assayed. As expected, GnRH and LH levels followed a similar developmental pattern, levels at midpuberty being higher than either prepuberty or early puberty. Circulating estradiol levels also were higher in midpuberty. The steroid measurements in the S-ME perfusates, however, exhibited a strikingly different pattern. Although androstenedione, testosterone, and progesterone did not change significantly in the perfusates across the different stages of puberty, estrone and estradiol were found to be high in the S-ME perfusates from prepubertal animals, declining in midpuberty and early puberty, respectively. Because serum estradiol levels increased over the same period, the S-ME to serum ratio fell dramatically in the midpubertal animals, more than 5-fold in the case of estradiol and more than 60-fold in the case of estrone. These results suggest that although the prepubertal period is indeed characterized by a period of GnRH inhibition that does not depend on ovarian hormone secretion, it is not in fact steroid independent. Rather, it may be mediated at least in part by estradiol produced in situ,
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».