Effect of Catechol Estrogens on Prolactin Secretion in the Rat: Lack of Correlation with Estrogenic Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temporal changes in plasma prolactin (PRL) levels caused by the administration of a number of different catechol estrogens to freely-moving conscious male rats were determined. The steroids with a wide range of affinity for the estrogen receptor were given in a single bolus (100 micrograms/kg) into the right atrium via an indwelling cannula. Plasma PRL concentration was monitored by taking blood samples every 2 min. The effect on PRL secretion was found to be more pronounced when the catechol estrogens were administered to rats bearing implants of estradiol and could not be correlated with their Kd values for the estrogen receptor. The synthetic estrogen, diethylstilbestrol, behaved anomalously by producing an elevation in plasma PRL only in estradiol-primed animals or after prolonged infusion. Diethylstilbestrol-treated rats showed no PRL response to 2-hydroxyestrone unlike those bearing Silastic capsules of estradiol. The experiments support the hypothesis that catechol estrogens generally act as short-term dopamine agonists, lowering PRL, but that those which possess estrogenic activity also show a more prolonged PRL-elevating effect. Thus, the overall action of this group of steroids will be determined by factors which influence these two parameters.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".