Maternal stress and fish reproduction: The role of cortisol revisited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Stressor‐induced elevation of circulating cortisol levels is generally considered to have an inhibitory effect on reproduction in teleosts. However, mature female fish have higher levels of circulating cortisol levels, and this is particularly telling in salmonids during their spawning migration. This raises the possibility that a cortisol buffering capacity is active at the level of the gonad. This is particularly important given the recent findings in zebrafish (Danio rerio, Cyprinidae) that zygotic cortisol content, either high or low, can alter developmental programming. Therefore, a tight regulation of corticosteroid during oogenesis may be essential for proper ovarian development. Here, we focus on the temporal dynamics of cortisol in the ovary and its role in regulating the different processes related to oogenesis. Maternally deposited cortisol along with the local production of this steroid by the ovary may be involved in the regulation of oogenesis. We propose two critical stages when cortisol may exert a modulatory effect on oogenesis. The first stage occurs during vitellogenesis when maternal cortisol is incorporated into the yolk, and the second is during maturation and ovulation when cortisol may have a regulatory role on the action of maturation‐inducing hormones. A key protective mechanism to prevent excess cortisol deposition appears to be the upregulation of 11β‐hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 2 in the theca and/or granulosa cells of the developing oocyte in response to excess maternal cortisol stimulation. Taken together, cortisol dynamics during oogenesis is complex, but maintaining a “Goldilocks” concentration of this steroid may be a critical process governing successful spawning and progeny development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".