Cited by 5Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorNeuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors

Comparison of Two Methods for the Bioassay of Oxytocin

FABIAN, MIRIAM, FORSLING, MARY L., JONES, J. J., LEE, J.·1969·Endocrinology

Abstract

Two preparations for the bioassay of oxytocin have been compared—the intact mammary gland of the lactating rat and an isolated strip of the gland. The usual threshold doses were of the same order (25 μU/ml in the test solution), and the accuracies of the assays were not significantly different (p >0.05 for the precision indices of 0.079 and 0.087, respectively). As a result of this investigation it was decided that the in vitro preparation is the one of preference, both for its practical advantages and because arginine vasopressin (AVP) is about 50% less potent on this preparation. Two considerations must be borne in mind when estimating theintrinsic oxytocin-like activity of AVP. 1) A constant ratio of mammotonic or milk-ejecting activity to antidiuretic activity cannot be assumed since these ratios vary from preparation to preparation. 2) In one third of the preparations the dose-response curve of AVP is steeper than that of oxytocin so that a definite ratio cannot be obtained; under these circumstances either a midpoint is taken or a new preparation is set up. A procedure has been developed for estimating the individual quantities of oxytocin and AVP present in a mixture. (Endocrinology85: 600, 1969)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1210/endo-85-3-600

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Practical bioassays for oxytocin were less sensitive than antidiuretic assays.

    “Antidiuretic assays benefitted from the extreme sensitivity of the urine concentrating mechanisms of the kidney, but practical bioassays for oxytocin were less sensitive.”
  • Bioassays using the nonpregnant rat uterus and mammary gland could generally detect only oxytocin concentrations above 25 μU/ml (42 pg/ml).

    “Bioassays using the nonpregnant rat uterus 49 and mammary gland bioassays 42 could generally detect only concentrations above 25 μU/ml (42 pg/ml).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
FABIAN, M., FORSLING, M. L., JONES, J. J., & LEE, J.
Affiliations
Charing Cross Hospital (GB)
Venue
Endocrinology
Published
1969-09
Volume
85
Issue
3
Pages
600-603
ISSN
  • 0013-7227 (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-7170
OpenAlex
W1999005658
Cited by
5
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Endocrinology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Growth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
Keywords
vasopressin, mammary gland, lactating rats, antidiuretic activity, dose-response curves, assay precision
MeSH terms
Acetylcholine, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Biological Assay, Female, Histamine H1 Antagonists, Lactation, Mammary Glands, Animal, Methods, Milk, Oxytocin, Phenoxybenzamine, Pregnancy, Serotonin Antagonists, Stimulation, Chemical, Sympatholytics, Vasopressins, Rats, In Vitro Techniques

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review