The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Effectiveness of Estrogen Replacement in Restoration of Cognitive Function after Long-Term Estrogen Withdrawal in Aging Rats
Open accessAbstract
Recent studies suggest that some aspects of learning and memory may be altered by a midlife loss of estrogen, indicating a potential causal relationship between the deficiency of ovarian hormones and cognitive aging. In this study, the effects of estrogen withdrawal and replacement were tested in middle-aged Fischer-344 rats using different memory tasks. Estrogen withdrawal accelerated the rate of cognitive aging. A deficit first occurred 4 months after ovariectomy in working memory, which was tested in a delayed-nonmatching-to-position task, and progressed from long-delay to short-delay trials. Reference memory, which was tested in a place discrimination task and a split-stem T-maze, was not affected by aging or ovariectomy. The efficacy of estrogen in ameliorating the cognitive deficit in old rats depended on the type of treatment (acute vs chronic) and whether the aging-related decline in a particular cognitive process was aggravated by estrogen withdrawal. Chronic estrogen treatment (implants) was effective in improving working memory only when primed with repeated injections of estrogen, indicating that simulating the estrogen fluctuations of the estrous cycle may be more effective than the widely used mode of chronic pharmacological treatment. A challenge with scopolamine revealed that ovariectomy-induced cognitive deterioration coincided with a compromised cholinergic system. Importantly, the estrogen treatment that had restored effectively the cognitive abilities of old ovariectomized rats did not reduce their sensitivity to scopolamine. Taking into consideration that estrogen was highly effective against the amnestic action of scopolamine when tested in young-adult rats, these data emphasize that mechanisms of the protective effect of estrogen differ in young and old rats.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Rocca, W. A., Bower, J. H., Maraganore, D. M., Ahlskog, J. E., Grossardt, B. R., de Andrade, M., & Melton, L. J. (2007) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000276984.19542.e6 · Cited by 827
Uncovering the mechanisms of estrogen effects on hippocampal function
Spencer, J. L., Waters, E. M., Romeo, R. D., Wood, G. E., Milner, T. A., & McEwen, B. S. (2008) · Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.yfrne.2007.08.006 · Cited by 414
Estrogen, Menopause, and the Aging Brain: How Basic Neuroscience Can Inform Hormone Therapy in Women
Morrison, J. H., Brinton, R. D., Schmidt, P. J., & Gore, A. C. (2006) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3369-06.2006 · Cited by 386
Modeling menopause: The utility of rodents in translational behavioral endocrinology research
Koebele, S. V., & Bimonte-Nelson, H. A. (2016) · Maturitas · doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2016.01.015 · Cited by 293
Rocca, W. A., Grossardt, B. R., & Shuster, L. T. (2011) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2010.10.031 · Cited by 283
Metadata
- Authors
- Markowska, A. L., & Savonenko, A. V.
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2002-12-15
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 24
- Pages
- 10985-10995
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- OpenAlex
- W2148944193
- Cited by
- 229
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effectiveness of Estrogen Replacement in Restoration of Cognitive Function after Long-Term Estrogen Withdrawal in Aging Rats. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.22-24-10985.2002
- The paper
- Markowska, A. L., & Savonenko, A. V. (2002). Effectiveness of Estrogen Replacement in Restoration of Cognitive Function after Long-Term Estrogen Withdrawal in Aging Rats. The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.22-24-10985.2002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.