Effect of estradiol or calcium treatment on mammotrophs of female middle-aged rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of estradiol dipropionate (EDP) or calcium glucoheptonate (Ca) on the morphology and stereology of the PRL cells in 14-month-oldWistar female rats were studied. The animals were treated daily with EDP in the dose of 0.625 mg/kg b.w. or calcium glucoheptonate (Ca; 11.4 mg/kg b.w.) for two weeks. The controls were injected with vehicle alone by the same schedule. Mammotrophs (PRL cells) were immunocytochemically localized by the PAP method. Blood PRL concentration was determined by Delfia procedure. In animals treated with EDP the volume of both, PRL cells and their nuclei, as well as the volume densities were significantly (p<0.05) increased by 17%, 9% and 38%, respectively, in comparison with the controls. In animals treated with Ca all morphometric parameters were insignificantly (p>0.05) decreased compared to control rats. Serum concentration of PRL was significantly increased (p<0.05) by 17% after estradiol treatment, but in Ca-treated females this parameter was insignificantly (p>0.05) changed by 2% compared to controls. Based on these results, it can be concluded that EDP expresses a strong stimulatory effect on the morphology and function of pituitary PRL cells.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".