Growth Hormone Secretion Induced by Thyrotropin-Releasing Hormone in Adult Chickens: Evidence of Dose-Dependent Induction of either Refractoriness or Sensitization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) has been previously demonstrated to both stimulate growth hormone (GH) secretion and induce refractoriness to subsequent TRH provocation in vivo in chickens. Challenges with TRH at intervals of 1 h evoked different patterns of GH release in anesthetized adult chickens dependent upon TRH dosage. Initially, the administration of TRH at 10 micrograms/kg increased the plasma concentration of GH. However, the second and subsequent, through to the sixth challenges with TRH did not affect GH release. Plasma concentrations of GH were elevated by repeated injections of TRH (1.0 micrograms/kg). The magnitude of the response was reduced for the second and third challenges with full recovery of the GH response to the fifth challenge and an enhanced response to the sixth challenge. Similar GH secretory responses to TRH (at 0.1 micrograms/kg) were observed with the first through fourth challenge but the magnitude of response was again increased for the fifth and sixth challenge. At a lower dose (0.01 microgram/kg), TRH did not initially affect plasma concentrations of GH. However, GH release was increased by the third challenge, and subsequent TRH administration evoked progressively larger increases in plasma concentration of GH. It would appear that only high doses of TRH induce refractoriness to subsequent challenge, while lower doses presensitize the pituitary to TRH. If TRH challenges at a dose which provokes the complete refractoriness (10 micrograms/kg) are administered at intervals of 2, 3 or 4 h, the GH secretory response is consistent for each challenge. The refractoriness to TRH is thus overcome within a period of 2 h.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".