Hypothalamic involvement and the role of progesterone in the NGF-induced LH surge pathway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To elucidate the mechanism by which nerve growth factor (NGF) influences the LH secretory pathway in camelids, a series of experiments were done to determine the involvement of the hypothalamus (Experiment 1), the role of GnRH neurons (Experiment 2), and the effect of progesterone (Experiment 3) on the NGF-induced LH surge and ovulation in llamas. In Experiment 1, the declining phase of the NGF-induced LH surge was used to determine if the decline is a result of pituitary depletion or hypothalamic unresponsiveness. Female llamas were treated with NGF and, 7 h later, assigned to three groups and given a second dose of NGF (n = 5), a dose of GnRH (n = 5), or saline (n = 6). The LH response was attenuated after the second dose of NGF vs GnRH. In Experiment 2, Fos expression (marker of neuronal activation) in GnRH neurons was examined in the hypothalamus of llamas after NGF or saline treatment (n = 3 per group). Despite an LH surge in the NGF group but not in the saline group, no differences were detected between groups in Fos/GnRH co-expression. In Experiment 3, llamas in low-, medium-, and high-plasma progesterone groups (n = 4 per group) were treated with NGF. The NGF-induced LH surge did not differ among treatment groups. Results from the present study show that the induction of a preovulatory LH surge by NGF may be controlled by a novel pathway involving GnRH neuro-terminals downstream of the hypothalamus and is independent of progesterone influence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".