2006
DOI: 10.1530/rep.1.00870
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Short photoperiod-induced ovarian regression is mediated by apoptosis in Siberian hamsters (Phodopus sungorus)

Abstract: Siberian hamster reproduction is mediated by photoperiod-induced changes in gonadal activity. However, little is known about how photoperiod induces cellular changes in ovarian function. We hypothesized that exposing female hamsters to short (inhibitory) as opposed to long (control) photoperiods would induce an apoptosis-mediated disruption of ovarian function. Ovaries and plasma from hamsters exposed to either long (LD, 16 h light:8 h darkness) or short (SD, 8 h light:16 h darkness) days were collected during… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
82
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(87 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
(46 reference statements)
4
82
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Plasma LH was elevated in FORKO mice relative to wild type and plasma estradiol was undetectable Balla et al (2003). Conversely, serum LH concentration has been reported to be much lower in SD than in LD female hamsters (Dodge & Badura 2002), but E 2 concentration does not appear to be consistently lower in SD when compared with LD hamsters (van den Hurk et al 2002, Scotti et al 2007; but see Moffatt-Blue et al 2006). The similarities and differences in the ovarian phenotype of SD hamsters with that of GDF9 deficient and FORKO mice should help direct future investigations to determine the mechanisms/signals that underlie the luteinization of granulosa cells and the up-regulation of AMH in SD ovaries.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Plasma LH was elevated in FORKO mice relative to wild type and plasma estradiol was undetectable Balla et al (2003). Conversely, serum LH concentration has been reported to be much lower in SD than in LD female hamsters (Dodge & Badura 2002), but E 2 concentration does not appear to be consistently lower in SD when compared with LD hamsters (van den Hurk et al 2002, Scotti et al 2007; but see Moffatt-Blue et al 2006). The similarities and differences in the ovarian phenotype of SD hamsters with that of GDF9 deficient and FORKO mice should help direct future investigations to determine the mechanisms/signals that underlie the luteinization of granulosa cells and the up-regulation of AMH in SD ovaries.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fiftytwo female hamsters were then randomly assigned to a short day room (8L:16D), while the remainder (n=18) stayed in LD conditions as controls. In order to ensure complete reproductive regression with SD exposure, animals remained housed in these photoperiods for 14 weeks (Moffatt-Blue et al, 2006;Ross et al, 2005). Short day females were randomly assigned to one of five groups: post-transfer (PT) week 0, 1, 2, 4, or 8 (n=10−11 per group).…”
Section: Animalsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…LD female control hamsters were randomly assigned into 3 groups and tissue was collected at the same time as PT week 0, 2, and 8 as a baseline comparison (n=6 per group). Four male hamsters were placed among the female hamsters in each room to promote ovarian cyclicity, and estrous cycles were synchronized by placing soiled male bedding in to the female cages four days prior to tissue collection (Dodge et al, 2002), as we have done before (Moffatt-Blue et al, 2006). Body mass was measured, and the stage of the estrous cycle was determined by vaginal cytology on collection dates.…”
Section: Animalsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations