Differences in Retinal Structure and Function between Aging Male and Female Sprague-Dawley Rats are Strongly Influenced by the Estrus Cycle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Biological sex and age are considered as two important factors that may influence the function and structure of the retina, an effect that might be governed by sexual hormones such as estrogen. The purpose of this study was to delineate the influence that biological sex and age exert on the retinal function and structure of rodents and also clarify the effect that the estrus cycle might exert on the retinal function of female rats. METHOD: The retinal function of 50 normal male and female albino Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats was investigated with the electroretinogram (ERG) at postnatal day (P) 30, 60, 100, 200, and 300 (n = 5-6 male and female rats/age). Following the ERG recording sessions, retinal histology was performed in both sexes. In parallel, the retinal function of premenopausal and menopausal female rats aged P540 were also compared. RESULTS: Sex and age-related changes in retinal structure and function were observed in our animal model. However, irrespective of age, no significant difference was observed in ERG and retinal histology obtained from male and female rats. Notwithstanding the above we did however notice that between P60 and P200 there was a gradual increase in ERG amplitudes of female rats compared to males. Furthermore, the ERG of premenopausal female rats aged 18 months old (P540) was larger compared to age-matched menopausal female rats as well as that of male rats. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that biological sex and age can influence the retinal function and structure of albino SD rats. Furthermore, we showed that cycled female rats have better retinal function compared to the menopausal female rats suggesting a beneficial effect of the estrus cycle on the retinal function.
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".