Appetite-suppressing effects and interactions of centrally administered corticotropin-releasing factor, urotensin I and serotonin in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF), urotensin I (UI) and serotonin (5-HT) are generally recognized as key regulators of the anorexigenic stress response in vertebrates, yet the proximal effects and potential interactions of these central messengers on food intake in salmonids are not known. Moreover, no study to date in fishes has compared the appetite-suppressing effects of CRF and UI using species-specific peptides. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to (1) assess the individual effects of synthesized rainbow trout CRF (rtCRF), rtUI as well as 5-HT on food intake in rainbow trout, and (2) determine whether the CRF and serotonergic systems interact in the regulation of food intake in this species. Intracerebroventricular (icv) injections of rtCRF and rtUI both suppressed food intake in a dose-related manner but rtUI [ED50 = 17.4 ng/g body weight (BW)] was significantly more potent than rtCRF (ED50 = 105.9 ng/g BW). Co-injection of either rtCRF or rtUI with the CRF receptor antagonist α-hCRF(9-41) blocked the reduction in food intake induced by CRF-related peptides. Icv injections of 5-HT also inhibited feeding in a dose-related manner (ED50 = 14.7 ng/g BW) and these effects were blocked by the serotonergic receptor antagonist methysergide. While the anorexigenic effects of 5-HT were reversed by α-hCRF(9-41) co-injection, the appetite-suppressing effects of either rtCRF or rtUI were not affected by methysergide co-injection. These results identify CRF, UI and 5-HT as anorexigenic agents in rainbow trout, and suggest that 5-HT-induced anorexia may be at least partially mediated by CRF- and/or UI-secreting neurons.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".