MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034232120 · doi:10.1139/z04-098

Sex and species differences in plasma oxytocin using an enzyme immunoassay

2004· article· en· W2034232120 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kristin M. Kramer, Bruce S. Cushing, C Sue Carter, Julie M. Wu, Mary Ann Ottinger

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrairie voleOxytocinImmunoassayBiologyNeuropeptideRadioimmunoassayMicrotusEndocrinologyHormoneInternal medicinePair bondVoleAntibodyZoologyBiochemistryImmunologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The neuropeptide hormone oxytocin (OT) is released peripherally and centrally and has been implicated in both physiology and behavior, especially sociosexual behaviors. Knowledge of OT levels in blood or other sources would be useful but these are rarely reported. Radioimmunoassay following extraction is the most commonly used method for measuring OT but is not ideal for use in small mammals in which blood volumes and concentrations of OT are low. Here we report a chemical and biological validation for a commercially available enzyme immunoassay for OT in unextracted plasma. In addition, comparisons of OT were made across species to allow comparison of the monogamous prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster (Wagner, 1842)) to the polygynous Sprague Dawley rat. These species were chosen because OT plays a role in the formation of social bonds and we predicted that the highly social prairie vole would have higher plasma OT than the less social rat. Results of this comparison confirmed our hypothesis. Further, OT was significantly higher in females than in males in both species. Our results indicate that this enzyme immunoassay can be used to assay plasma OT in rodents and that the predicted correlations exist between plasma OT and gender as well as species-typical social behavior.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations101
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorFrench-language works237,207