Variation in Gonadotrophin‐Releasing Hormone‐1 Gene Expression in the Preoptic Area Predicts Transitions in Seasonal Reproductive State
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many seasonally reproducing animals, the experience of prolonged exposure to constant photoperiods results in the induction of a state of photorefractoriness, which is defined as a lack of responsiveness to a previously stimulatory photoperiod. The physiological and genetic processes that control photorefractoriness are not well understood; however, the hallmark of photorefractoriness is an endogenous change in the physiological response to a constant photoperiod. It is already known that preoptic area (POA) gnrh1 gene expression declines during the development of refractoriness to long-day stimulation in European starlings. We employed in situ hybridisation histochemistry to characterise changes in POA gnrh1 mRNA expression during the reinstatement of photosensitivity in female starlings. Photorefractory starlings moved to short days (8L:16D) increased optical density of gnrh1 expressing cells within 10 days. Exposure to 30 short days resulted in greater visible gnrh1 cell numbers, with no detectable change in measures of ovarian follicular volume and oviduct mass. We subsequently examined the extent of gnrh1 expression in response to photostimulation after incremental periods on short day lengths. A significant long-day-induced increase in both gnrh1 expression and ovarian and oviduct mass occurred only after at least 30 short days. These findings demonstrate that the recovery of photorefractoriness involves an increase in gnrh1 mRNA expression and expands upon our previous knowledge that the development of photosensitivity is associated with an increase in both the precursor proGnRH1-GAP and GnRH1 peptides in the POA. Importantly, the change in the brain sensitivity occurs well before such changes can be detected via variation in ovarian activity.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".