The mixed legacy of the rat estrous cycle.
Estrous cycle
Sex bias
Sex differences
Trait variability
Journal
Biology of sex differences
ISSN: 2042-6410
Titre abrégé: Biol Sex Differ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101548963
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 09 2023
04 09 2023
Historique:
received:
20
06
2023
accepted:
24
08
2023
medline:
6
9
2023
pubmed:
5
9
2023
entrez:
4
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The rat estrous cycle first characterized by Long and Evans in 1922 profoundly affected the course of endocrine research. Investigators took advantage of sex steroid hormone fluctuations associated with the cycle to assess hormonal influences on anxiety, depression, food intake, stress, brain structure and other traits. Similarities of the rat estrous and human menstrual cycles facilitated understanding of human reproductive physiology. I assessed the impact of awareness of the estrous cycle on the emergence of a sex bias that excluded female rats from biomedical research. Beginning with the 1918 volume of the American Journal of Physiology and ending in 1976 when the journal subdivided into several separate disciplinary journals, all studies conducted on rats were downloaded; the use of females, males, both sexes and sex left unspecified was tabulated for 485 articles. A second analysis tracked the number of rat estrous cycle studies across all disciplines listed in PubMed from 1950 to 2021. The description and awareness of variability associated with the rat estrous cycle was correlated with a precipitous decline in investigations that incorporated both sexes, a marked increase in male-only studies and a striking sex bias that excluded female rats. The number of rat estrous cycles studies increased markedly from earlier decades to a peak in 2021. The initial description the rat estrous cycle was correlated with a substantial decline in investigations that incorporated both sexes; one result was a marked increase in male-only studies and a striking sex bias that excluded female rats from biomedical research. Recognition of the advantages of studies that incorporate the rat estrous cycle has resulted in recent years in an increase of such investigations. Female rats and females of several other species are not more variable than their male counterparts across traits, arguing for female inclusion without requiring cycle monitoring. There, remain, however, many advantages of incorporating the estrous cycle in contemporary research.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The rat estrous cycle first characterized by Long and Evans in 1922 profoundly affected the course of endocrine research. Investigators took advantage of sex steroid hormone fluctuations associated with the cycle to assess hormonal influences on anxiety, depression, food intake, stress, brain structure and other traits. Similarities of the rat estrous and human menstrual cycles facilitated understanding of human reproductive physiology. I assessed the impact of awareness of the estrous cycle on the emergence of a sex bias that excluded female rats from biomedical research.
METHODS
Beginning with the 1918 volume of the American Journal of Physiology and ending in 1976 when the journal subdivided into several separate disciplinary journals, all studies conducted on rats were downloaded; the use of females, males, both sexes and sex left unspecified was tabulated for 485 articles. A second analysis tracked the number of rat estrous cycle studies across all disciplines listed in PubMed from 1950 to 2021.
RESULTS
The description and awareness of variability associated with the rat estrous cycle was correlated with a precipitous decline in investigations that incorporated both sexes, a marked increase in male-only studies and a striking sex bias that excluded female rats. The number of rat estrous cycles studies increased markedly from earlier decades to a peak in 2021.
CONCLUSIONS
The initial description the rat estrous cycle was correlated with a substantial decline in investigations that incorporated both sexes; one result was a marked increase in male-only studies and a striking sex bias that excluded female rats from biomedical research. Recognition of the advantages of studies that incorporate the rat estrous cycle has resulted in recent years in an increase of such investigations. Female rats and females of several other species are not more variable than their male counterparts across traits, arguing for female inclusion without requiring cycle monitoring. There, remain, however, many advantages of incorporating the estrous cycle in contemporary research.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37667337
doi: 10.1186/s13293-023-00542-7
pii: 10.1186/s13293-023-00542-7
pmc: PMC10476291
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
55Informations de copyright
© 2023. Society for Women's Health Research and BioMed Central Ltd.
Références
Physiol Behav. 1986;36(6):991-6
pubmed: 3725927
Elife. 2020 Jun 09;9:
pubmed: 32513386
Physiol Behav. 2001 Oct;74(3):399-403
pubmed: 11714505
Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1999 Dec;64(4):803-12
pubmed: 10593204
Brain Res. 1998 Nov 16;811(1-2):96-104
pubmed: 9804908
Behav Brain Res. 2010 Nov 12;213(1):10-8
pubmed: 20416343
Physiol Behav. 1981 Jan;26(1):21-5
pubmed: 7195042
Endocrinology. 2005 Apr;146(4):1650-73
pubmed: 15618360
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2014 Mar;40:1-5
pubmed: 24456941
Biol Sex Differ. 2015 Oct 29;6:18
pubmed: 26557976
Biol Sex Differ. 2016 Jul 26;7:34
pubmed: 27468347
Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1999 Jan;62(1):53-60
pubmed: 9972845
Physiol Behav. 2018 Oct 1;194:560-567
pubmed: 30025787
Biochem Pharmacol. 2022 Apr;198:114949
pubmed: 35143755
Ann Neurosci. 2017 Jul;24(3):136-145
pubmed: 28867895
Physiol Behav. 2021 Jan 1;228:113203
pubmed: 33045240
PLoS One. 2019 Jul 15;14(7):e0218935
pubmed: 31306437
Front Neuroendocrinol. 2020 Apr;57:100835
pubmed: 32070715
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2011 Jul;216(1):53-62
pubmed: 21308466
Neuropsychopharmacology. 2003 Apr;28(4):704-10
pubmed: 12655315
Elife. 2020 Nov 17;9:
pubmed: 33198888
Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2022 Jul;141:105776
pubmed: 35489312
Stress. 2020 Jul;23(4):386-392
pubmed: 31672079
Biol Sex Differ. 2022 Oct 28;13(1):62
pubmed: 36307876
J Neurosci. 1990 Dec;10(12):4035-9
pubmed: 2269895
Reproduction. 2008 Jul;136(1):105-15
pubmed: 18390689
Biol Sex Differ. 2021 Apr 22;12(1):32
pubmed: 33888158
Front Mol Neurosci. 2019 Apr 11;12:74
pubmed: 31031589
Horm Behav. 2017 Jan;87:69-79
pubmed: 27984032
Int J Neurosci. 2001;108(3-4):175-91
pubmed: 11699190
Nat Neurosci. 2021 Apr;24(4):457-464
pubmed: 33649507
Physiol Behav. 1988;43(3):389-96
pubmed: 3262879
Biol Sex Differ. 2022 Jul 23;13(1):41
pubmed: 35870975
Genome Biol. 2015 Dec 02;16:256
pubmed: 26628058
Brain Res. 2009 Feb 27;1257:65-74
pubmed: 19133236
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2011 Jan;35(3):565-72
pubmed: 20620164