Systemic L-ornithine supplementation specifically increases ovarian putrescine levels during ovulation in mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In all mammalian species examined thus far, the ovaries produce a burst of ornithine decarboxylase (ODC) and putrescine during ovulation or after application of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). Aged mice have significantly reduced levels of this periovulatory ODC and putrescine rise. Putrescine supplementation, in vitro during oocyte maturation or in mouse drinking water during the periovulatory period, reduces egg aneuploidies and embryo resorption, improving fertility of aged mice. These studies suggest that periovulatory putrescine supplementation may be a simple and effective therapy for reproductive aging for women. However, putrescine supplementation is expected to increase widespread tissue putrescine levels, raising concerns of nonspecific and unwanted side effects. Given that ODC is highly expressed in the ovaries during ovulation but otherwise exhibits low activity in most tissues, we hypothesized that periovulatory supplementation of L-ornithine, the substrate of ODC, might be suitable for delivering putrescine specifically to the ovaries. In this study, we have demonstrated that systemic application of L-ornithine via oral gavage or subcutaneous injection increased ovarian putrescine levels; the increase was restricted to animals that had been injected with hCG. Furthermore, L-ornithine specifically increased ovarian putrescine levels without affecting putrescine levels in any other tissues. However, our attempts to improve fertility of aged mice through L-ornithine supplementation in mouse drinking water produced either no effects (1% L-ornithine) or negative impact on fertility (4% ornithine). Our results suggest that it might not be feasible to achieve fertility-enhancing ovarian putrescine levels via L-ornithine supplementation in drinking water without encountering undesired consequences of high dose of exogenous L-ornithine.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".