help button home button Endocrine Society Endocrinology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gee, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Finch, C. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gee, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Finch, C. E.

Endocrinology, Vol 114, 685-693, Copyright © 1984 by Endocrine Society


ARTICLES

The regulation of luteinizing hormone and prolactin in C57BL/6J mice: effects of estradiol implant size, duration of ovariectomy, and aging

DM Gee, K Flurkey, CV Mobbs, YN Sinha and CE Finch

The induction of a LH surge by estradiol (E2) implants was characterized in ovariectomized C57BL/6J mice. Various times after ovariectomy mice were given a priming E2 implant, followed by an LH surge-inducing E2 implant, and were sampled 30 h later at darkness. The magnitude of the E2-induced LH surge was influenced by the postovariectomy interval, sizes of the implants, and age. Mice ovariectomized for 30-60 days before E2 implantation displayed larger surges than those ovariectomized for 4 days. Priming implants yielding 10 pg E2/ml plasma permitted the subsequent induction of vigorous LH surges, whereas no LH surges were observed with slightly larger priming implants that yielded 15 pg E2/ml. The size of the surge-inducing implant was correlated with the size of the subsequent LH surge. However, regardless of implant size, aging mice (8 vs. 13 months old) had smaller LH surges. Sequential daily LH surges were not observed under any conditions, suggesting that mice differ from rats and hamsters in their regulation of LH by E2. Plasma PRL was slightly elevated in the afternoon just before the LH surge, but returned to basal levels during the LH surge, indicating an uncoupling of the LH and PRL surges. The two-stage E2 implantation protocol for inducing LH surges by physiological levels of E2 allows more detailed examination of the priming vs. surge-inducing effects of E2.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Endocrinology Endocrine Reviews J. Clin. End. & Metab.
Molecular Endocrinology Recent Prog. Horm. Res. All Endocrine Journals
Copyright © 1984 by The Endocrine Society