Evidence that the Arcuate Nucleus Is an Important Site of Progesterone Negative Feedback in the Ewe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is now considerable evidence that dynorphin neurons mediate the negative feedback actions of progesterone to inhibit GnRH and LH pulse frequency, but the specific neurons have yet to be identified. In ewes, dynorphin neurons in the arcuate nucleus (ARC) and preoptic area (POA) are likely candidates based on colocalization with progesterone receptors. These studies tested the hypothesis that progesterone negative feedback occurs in either the ARC or POA by determining whether microimplants of progesterone into either site would inhibit LH pulse frequency (study 1) and whether microimplants of the progesterone receptor antagonist, RU486, would disrupt the inhibitory effects of peripheral progesterone (study 2). Both studies were done in ovariectomized (OVX) and estradiol-treated OVX ewes. In study 1, no inhibitory effects of progesterone were observed during treatment in either area. In study 2, microimplants of RU486 into the ARC disrupted the negative-feedback actions of peripheral progesterone treatments on LH pulse frequency in both OVX and OVX+estradiol ewes. In contrast, microimplants of RU486 into the POA had no effect on the ability of systemic progesterone to inhibit LH pulse frequency. We thus conclude that the ARC is one important site of progesterone-negative feedback in the ewe. These data, which are the first evidence on the neural sites in which progesterone inhibits GnRH pulse frequency in any species, are consistent with the hypothesis that ARC dynorphin neurons mediate this action of progesterone.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".