Androgens and Adult Neurogenesis in the Hippocampus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adult neurogenesis in the hippocampus is modulated by steroid hormones, including androgens, in male rodents. In this review, we summarize research showing that chronic exposure to androgens, such as testosterone and dihydrotestosterone, enhances the survival of new neurons in the dentate gyrus of male, but not female, rodents, via the androgen receptor. However, the neurogenesis promoting the effect of androgens in the dentate gyrus may be limited to younger adulthood as it is not evident in middle-aged male rodents. Although direct exposure to androgens in adult or middle age does not significantly influence neurogenesis in female rodents, the aromatase inhibitor letrozole enhances neurogenesis in the hippocampus of middle-aged female mice. Unlike other androgens, androgenic anabolic steroids reduce neurogenesis in the hippocampus of male rodents. Collectively, the research indicates that the ability of androgens to enhance hippocampal neurogenesis in adult rodents is dependent on dose, androgen type, sex, duration, and age. We discuss these findings and how androgens may be influencing neuroprotection, via neurogenesis in the hippocampus, in the context of health and disease.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".