The Effect of the Manipulation of Follicle-Stimulating Hormone (FSH)-Peak Characteristics on Follicular Wave Dynamics in Sheep: Does an Ovarian-Independent Endogenous Rhythm in FSH Secretion Exist?1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We designed three experiments to investigate the relationship between FSH peaks and ovarian follicular waves and to examine whether an endogenous rhythm of FSH peaks exists in sheep. In experiment 1, anestrous ewes were treated with ovine FSH (oFSH) or vehicle (6 ewes per group) at the expected time of an endogenous FSH peak, to double the FSH-peak amplitude in treated ewes. In experiment 2, anestrous ewes were treated with either oFSH or vehicle (6 ewes per group) at the expected time of two consecutive interpeak nadirs, such that the treated ewes had 5 FSH peaks in the time frame of 3 FSH peaks in control ewes. In experiment 3, to measure FSH concentrations, daily blood samples were collected from 5 cyclic ewes for a control period during the estrous cycle and then for three 17-day periods after ovariectomy. Daily blood samples were collected from another group of 8 ovariectomized ewes that were treated with estradiol-releasing implants and intravaginal progestogen sponges. Doubling the FSH-peak amplitude did not alter the characteristics of the following follicular wave. Increasing the frequency of FSH peaks stimulated the emergence of additional follicular waves, but did not alter the rhythmic occurrence of FSH peaks and follicular wave emergence. Endogenous follicular waves in oFSH-treated ewes emerged and grew in the presence of the growing largest follicle of the induced follicular waves. Finally, based on the observation of serum FSH concentrations in ovariectomized ewes, it appears that there exists an endogenous rhythm for peaks in daily serum FSH concentrations, which is, at least in part, independent of regulation by ovarian follicular growth patterns.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".