Novel Target Sites for Estrogen Action in the Dorsal Hippocampus: An Examination of Synaptic Proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structural studies have shown that estrogens increase dendritic spine number in the dorsal CA1 field of rat hippocampus using Golgi impregnation as well as the number of dorsal CA1 synapses visualized via electron microscopy. The present study was carried out to further these findings by examining changes in the levels of pre- and postsynaptic proteins using radioimmunocytochemistry (RICC). In this study, 2 days of estradiol-benzoate treatment produced significant and comparable increases in synaptophysin, syntaxin, and spinophilin immunoreactivity (IR) in the CA1 region of the dorsal hippocampus of ovariectomized female rats. For spinophilin, IR was also increased in the hilar region of the dentate gyrus as well as CA3. In all cases, the nonsteroidal estrogen antagonist CI628, which has been previously shown to block spine formation, inhibited the effects of estrogen. However, these protein differences were not detected in whole hippocampus using Western blots. These findings add to a growing body of evidence that estrogens increase synapses in the CA1 region of hippocampus along with changes in previously unidentified sites. These results also suggest that RICC is a rapid and sensitive method for examining molecular changes in synaptic profiles in anatomically distinct brain regions.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".