MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992662839 · doi:10.1159/000122129

Pars Intermedia and Pars Distalis:Two Sites of ACTH Production in the Rat Hypophysis

2008· article· en· W1992662839 on OpenAlexaff
Jacob Kraicer, J. L. Gosbee, Sergio A. Bencosme

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroendocrinology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPars intermediaEndocrinologyInternal medicineAdrenalectomyBiologyPituitary glandImmunostainingMedicineImmunohistochemistryHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pars intermedia and pars distalis of the rat hypophysis were examined, following experimentally induced alterations in ACTH secretion. The concentration of ACTH in the pars inter-media is considerably greater than that in the pars distalis. At 1 month after adrenalectomy, the ACTH concentration in the pars distalis increased 3-fold, while that in the pars intermedia remained unchanged. Following chronic administration of cortisol, the ACTH concentration in the pars distalis fell to 27% of the control, while the fall in ACTH concentration in the pars intermedia was not significant. The immunoglobulin-peroxidase bridge technique, employing 17–39 ACTH antiserum, demonstrated the presence of ACTH-containing cells, both in the pars intermedia and in the pars distalis. Following adrenalectomy or chronic administration of cortisol, there was no change in the immunostaining or in the electron microscopic appearance of the cells of the pars intermedia. These findings suggest that although a relation between the pars intermedia and ACTH is established, this relation is different from that between the pars distalis and ACTH.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations74
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroendocrinologySame topicStress Responses and CortisolFrench-language works237,207