2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2015.01.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Towards more physiological manipulations of hormones in field studies: Comparing the release dynamics of three kinds of testosterone implants, silastic tubing, time-release pellets and beeswax

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
34
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
1
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These concentrations were shown to be stable for up to 7 weeks in rabbits (Stratton et al ., ). Concentrations were still very high in house sparrows ( Passer domesticus ) 42 days after implantation (Turek et al ., ) and in Japanese quail these circulating concentrations were shown to be very stable for up to 6 weeks (Desjardins & Turek, ) although a more recent study in the same species identified peak concentrations on day 1 after implantation and a progressive decline during the 29 following days (Quispe et al ., ). Similarly, we observed here a fairly substantial and continuous decline of the plasma concentrations in testosterone–treated females after the peak observed on day 1.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…These concentrations were shown to be stable for up to 7 weeks in rabbits (Stratton et al ., ). Concentrations were still very high in house sparrows ( Passer domesticus ) 42 days after implantation (Turek et al ., ) and in Japanese quail these circulating concentrations were shown to be very stable for up to 6 weeks (Desjardins & Turek, ) although a more recent study in the same species identified peak concentrations on day 1 after implantation and a progressive decline during the 29 following days (Quispe et al ., ). Similarly, we observed here a fairly substantial and continuous decline of the plasma concentrations in testosterone–treated females after the peak observed on day 1.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Another important issue in the case of manipulations of mothers is the temporal pattern of hormone administration to a female. Specifically, there might be differences between single‐dose hormone administration (as in the case of injections) and a gradual release from implants (e.g., Bonier, Martin & Wingfield, ; Henriksen et al , ; for differences among types of implants see Quispe et al , ). However, we did not detect any effect of hormone delivery method.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…S3). Such an increase may be due to the following reasons: (i) TRPs are commercially available, and thus their use is a more standardized method (SIL are manually manufactured, and doses are likely subjected to higher variability within and between studies); (ii) TRPs provide a more controlled release of exogenous hormone compared with SIL (Fusani, 2008;Quispe et al, 2015), whose polymer membranes prevent Cort diffusion (Kincl et al, 1968) and force researchers to manually puncture holes in the tube or even cut the ends of it (thereby increasing variability among studies); (iii) TRPs have a pre-defined theoretical period of duration specified by the manufacturer, which may facilitate experimental design (but see our considerations above) and facilitate comparisons among studies; and (iv) TRPs are selfdegrading, avoiding the need to re-capture study subjects to remove implants at the end of the experiment (which may be difficult in the wild). However, tight research budgets might limit a wider use of TRP implants, as these are substantially more expensive than SIL.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%