Progesterone and estrogen influence postexercise leukocyte infiltration in overiectomized female rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited research has been conducted on the effects of progesterone alone, or in combination with estrogen, on leukocyte infiltration in skeletal muscle following exercise. To investigate the effects of these female sex hormones, ovariectomized female rats were divided into 4 exercise and 4 control groups: sham, estrogen, progesterone, and a combination of estrogen plus progesterone. Following 8 days of hormone replacement and 24 h postexercise, soleus (red) and superficial (white) vastus muscles were removed and immunostained for His48 (neutrophil)- and ED1 (macrophage)-positive cells. The postexercise increase in leukocyte infiltration was completely (p < 0.05) attenuated with estrogen supplementation alone in both muscle types, relative to sham. Progesterone treatment alone also resulted in a smaller (20%-30%) but significant (p < 0.05) attenuation of postexercise muscle leukocyte infiltration. The combination of estrogen and progesterone treatment did not significantly alter the attenuation seen with estrogen supplementation alone. Hence, progesterone can independently attenuate postexercise muscle leukocyte infiltration, albeit to a lesser degree than estrogen, and it will not negate or accentuate the effect of estrogen.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".