2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2007.08.083
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Short photoperiod and testosterone-induced modification of GnRH release from the hypothalamus of Peromyscus maniculatus

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

2
9
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
2
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Results from our population of white-footed mice (19) and from studies on a population of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) by Blank and colleagues (3,29) indicate substantial genetic variation in reproductive photoresponsiveness within natural populations. In white-footed mice, this study shows genetic variation in levels of LH (Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Results from our population of white-footed mice (19) and from studies on a population of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) by Blank and colleagues (3,29) indicate substantial genetic variation in reproductive photoresponsiveness within natural populations. In white-footed mice, this study shows genetic variation in levels of LH (Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…3) that is correlated with genetic variation in reproductive photoresponsiveness. In the deer mouse population studied by Blank and colleagues, phenotypic variation in reproductive photoresponsiveness was also correlated with variation in levels of LH, with indirect evidence that the phenotypic variation has an underlying genetic basis (3,29). Both sets of studies suggest that variation in levels of LH may be a cause of variation in reproductive function in wild populations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In many populations, some individuals show complete phenotypic plasticity by fully suppressing gametogenesis and reproduction in winter, some are intermediate, and others lack phenotypic plasticity, showing no response to short photoperiod (Bronson, 1989; Bronson & Heideman, 1994; Prendergast et al, 2001). The variation in response to short photoperiod has a genetic basis (Desjardins, Bronson & Blank, 1986; Heideman & Pittman, 2009; Prendergast et al, 2001), including genetic variation in gonadal development and in physiological traits in the reproductive neurons and hormones of the hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal (HPG) axis (Blank & Ruf, 1992; Heideman & Pittman, 2009; Mintz, Lavenburg & Blank, 2007; Prendergast et al, 2001). An important question is whether there is genetic variation in behaviour that is related to variation in the development of reproductive organs and availability of gametes, and whether behavioural and morphological variation might cause differences in the number of offspring and size of litters.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%