All posts by medical

Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics

Welcome

The objectives of the Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics are to play a leading role in biomedical research, to excel in the teaching of physiology and biophysics, and to maintain a creative, supportive and productive environment in which faculty, students and staff are able to fulfill their professional and career objectives and aspirations.

About our Department

Go here to see the original:
Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics

Neuroscience Graduate Programs – gradschools.com

San Antonio, TX University of Texas Health Science Center At San Antonio Cell Biology, Genetics, and Molecular Medicine

Cell Biology, Genetics & Molecular Medicine (CGM) includes courses can be individually tailored to a specific student's interests including aging, cancer, genetics, immunology, neuroscience, metabolism and physiology.

Program: Hybrid

Degree: Master, Doctorate

Follow this link:
Neuroscience Graduate Programs - gradschools.com

Neuroscience | UCLA Graduate Programs

UCLA's Graduation Program in Neuroscience offers the following degree(s):

Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.)

With questions not answered here or on the programs site (above), please contact the program directly.

Neuroscience Graduate Program at UCLA 1506D Gonda Center Box 951761 Los Angeles, CA 90095-1761

Visit the Neurosciences faculty roster

Visit the registrar's site for the Neurosciences course descriptions

(310) 825-8153

neurophd@mednet.ucla.edu

004F

Go here to see the original:
Neuroscience | UCLA Graduate Programs

Neuroscience Program

The Interdepartmental Program in Neuroscience (IPN) at George Mason brings together experimental and theoretical scientists.

It draws from research in many departments -- Psychology, Molecular Neuroscience, Molecular and Microbiology, Electrical Engineering, Physics and Astronomy, and Computational Biology and Bioinformatics.

More:
Neuroscience Program

Psychoneuroimmunology – Wikipedia

Psychoneuroimmunology (PNI), also referred to as psychoendoneuroimmunology (PENI) or psychoneuroendocrinoimmunology (PNEI), is the study of the interaction between psychological processes and the nervous and immune systems of the human body.[1] PNI takes an interdisciplinary approach, incorporating psychology, neuroscience, immunology, physiology, genetics, pharmacology, molecular biology, psychiatry, behavioral medicine, infectious diseases, endocrinology, and rheumatology.

The main interests of PNI are the interactions between the nervous and immune systems and the relationships between mental processes and health. PNI studies, among other things, the physiological functioning of the neuroimmune system in health and disease; disorders of the neuroimmune system (autoimmune diseases; hypersensitivities; immune deficiency); and the physical, chemical and physiological characteristics of the components of the neuroimmune system in vitro, in situ, and in vivo.

Interest in the relationship between psychiatric syndromes or symptoms and immune function has been a consistent theme since the beginning of modern medicine.

Claude Bernard, a French physiologist of the Musum national d'Histoire naturelle, formulated the concept of the milieu interieur in the mid-1800s. In 1865, Bernard described the perturbation of this internal state: "... there are protective functions of organic elements holding living materials in reserve and maintaining without interruption humidity, heat and other conditions indispensable to vital activity. Sickness and death are only a dislocation or perturbation of that mechanism" (Bernard, 1865). Walter Cannon, a professor of physiology at Harvard University coined the commonly used term, homeostasis, in his book The Wisdom of the Body, 1932, from the Greek word homoios, meaning similar, and stasis, meaning position. In his work with animals, Cannon observed that any change of emotional state in the beast, such as anxiety, distress, or rage, was accompanied by total cessation of movements of the stomach (Bodily Changes in Pain, Hunger, Fear and Rage, 1915). These studies looked into the relationship between the effects of emotions and perceptions on the autonomic nervous system, namely the sympathetic and parasympathetic responses that initiated the recognition of the freeze, fight or flight response. His findings were published from time to time in professional journals, then summed up in book form in The Mechanical Factors of Digestion, published in 1911.

Hans Selye, a student of Johns Hopkins University and McGill University, and a researcher at Universit de Montral, experimented with animals by putting them under different physical and mental adverse conditions and noted that under these difficult conditions the body consistently adapted to heal and recover. Several years of experimentation that formed the empiric foundation of Selye's concept of the General Adaptation Syndrome. This syndrome consists of an enlargement of the adrenal gland, atrophy of the thymus, spleen, and other lymphoid tissue, and gastric ulcerations.

Selye describes three stages of adaptation, including an initial brief alarm reaction, followed by a prolonged period of resistance, and a terminal stage of exhaustion and death. This foundational work led to a rich line of research on the biological functioning of glucocorticoids.[2]

Mid-20th century studies of psychiatric patients reported immune alterations in psychotic individuals, including lower numbers of lymphocytes[3][4] and poorer antibody response to pertussis vaccination, compared with nonpsychiatric control subjects.[5] In 1964, George F. Solomon, from the University of California in Los Angeles, and his research team coined the term "psychoimmunology" and published a landmark paper: "Emotions, immunity, and disease: a speculative theoretical integration."[6]

In 1975, Robert Ader and Nicholas Cohen, at the University of Rochester, advanced PNI with their demonstration of classic conditioning of immune function, and they subsequently coined the term "psychoneuroimmunology".[7][8] Ader was investigating how long conditioned responses (in the sense of Pavlov's conditioning of dogs to drool when they heard a bell ring) might last in laboratory rats. To condition the rats, he used a combination[clarification needed] of saccharin-laced water (the conditioned stimulus) and the drug Cytoxan, which unconditionally induces nausea and taste aversion and suppression of immune function. Ader was surprised to discover that after conditioning, just feeding the rats saccharin-laced water was associated with the death of some animals and he proposed that they had been immunosuppressed after receiving the conditioned stimulus. Ader (a psychologist) and Cohen (an immunologist) directly tested this hypothesis by deliberately immunizing conditioned and unconditioned animals, exposing these and other control groups to the conditioned taste stimulus, and then measuring the amount of antibody produced. The highly reproducible results revealed that conditioned rats exposed to the conditioned stimulus were indeed immuno suppressed. In other words, a signal via the nervous system (taste) was affecting immune function. This was one of the first scientific experiments that demonstrated that the nervous system can affect the immune system.

In 1981, David L. Felten, then working at the Indiana University School of Medicine, discovered a network of nerves leading to blood vessels as well as cells of the immune system. The researcher, along with his team, also found nerves in the thymus and spleen terminating near clusters of lymphocytes, macrophages, and mast cells, all of which help control immune function. This discovery provided one of the first indications of how neuro-immune interaction occurs.

Ader, Cohen, and Felten went on to edit the groundbreaking book Psychoneuroimmunology in 1981, which laid out the underlying premise that the brain and immune system represent a single, integrated system of defense.

In 1985, research by neuropharmacologist Candace Pert, of the National Institutes of Health at Georgetown University, revealed that neuropeptide-specific receptors are present on the cell walls of both the brain and the immune system.[9][10] The discovery that neuropeptides and neurotransmitters act directly upon the immune system shows their close association with emotions and suggests mechanisms through which emotions, from the limbic system, and immunology are deeply interdependent. Showing that the immune and endocrine systems are modulated not only by the brain but also by the central nervous system itself affected the understanding of emotions, as well as disease.

Contemporary advances in psychiatry, immunology, neurology, and other integrated disciplines of medicine has fostered enormous growth for PNI. The mechanisms underlying behaviorally induced alterations of immune function, and immune alterations inducing behavioral changes, are likely to have clinical and therapeutic implications that will not be fully appreciated until more is known about the extent of these interrelationships in normal and pathophysiological states.

PNI research is looking for the exact mechanisms by which specific brainimmunity effects are achieved. Evidence for nervous systemimmune system interactions exists at several biological levels.

The immune system and the brain talk to each other through signaling pathways. The brain and the immune system are the two major adaptive systems of the body. Two major pathways are involved in this cross-talk: the Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA axis) and the sympathetic nervous system (SNS). The activation of SNS during an immune response might be aimed to localize the inflammatory response.

The body's primary stress management system is the HPA axis. The HPA axis responds to physical and mental challenge to maintain homeostasis in part by controlling the body's cortisol level. Dysregulation of the HPA axis is implicated in numerous stress-related diseases, with evidence from meta-analyses indicating that different types/duration of stressors and unique personal variables can shape the HPA response.[11] HPA axis activity and cytokines are intrinsically intertwined: inflammatory cytokines stimulate adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and cortisol secretion, while, in turn, glucocorticoids suppress the synthesis of proinflammatory cytokines.

Molecules called pro-inflammatory cytokines, which include interleukin-1 (IL-1), Interleukin-2 (IL-2), interleukin-6 (IL-6), Interleukin-12 (IL-12), Interferon-gamma (IFN-Gamma) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) can affect brain growth as well as neuronal function. Circulating immune cells such as macrophages, as well as glial cells (microglia and astrocytes) secrete these molecules. Cytokine regulation of hypothalamic function is an active area of research for the treatment of anxiety-related disorders.[12]

Cytokines mediate and control immune and inflammatory responses. Complex interactions exist between cytokines, inflammation and the adaptive responses in maintaining homeostasis. Like the stress response, the inflammatory reaction is crucial for survival. Systemic inflammatory reaction results in stimulation of four major programs:[13]

These are mediated by the HPA axis and the SNS. Common human diseases such as allergy, autoimmunity, chronic infections and sepsis are characterized by a dysregulation of the pro-inflammatory versus anti-inflammatory and T helper (Th1) versus (Th2) cytokine balance.

Recent studies show pro-inflammatory cytokine processes take place during depression, mania and bipolar disease, in addition to autoimmune hypersensitivity and chronic infections.

Chronic secretion of stress hormones, glucocorticoids (GCs) and catecholamines (CAs), as a result of disease, may reduce the effect of neurotransmitters, including serotonin[medical citation needed], norepinephrine and dopamine, or other receptors in the brain, thereby leading to the dysregulation of neurohormones. Under stimulation, norepinephrine is released from the sympathetic nerve terminals in organs, and the target immune cells express adrenoreceptors. Through stimulation of these receptors, locally released norepinephrine, or circulating catecholamines such as epinephrine, affect lymphocyte traffic, circulation, and proliferation, and modulate cytokine production and the functional activity of different lymphoid cells.

Glucocorticoids also inhibit the further secretion of corticotropin-releasing hormone from the hypothalamus and ACTH from the pituitary (negative feedback). Under certain conditions stress hormones may facilitate inflammation through induction of signaling pathways and through activation of the Corticotropin-releasing hormone.

These abnormalities and the failure of the adaptive systems to resolve inflammation affect the well-being of the individual, including behavioral parameters, quality of life and sleep, as well as indices of metabolic and cardiovascular health, developing into a "systemic anti-inflammatory feedback" and/or "hyperactivity" of the local pro-inflammatory factors which may contribute to the pathogenesis of disease.

This systemic or neuro-inflammation and neuroimmune activation have been shown to play a role in the etiology of a variety of neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, multiple sclerosis, pain, and AIDS-associated dementia. However, cytokines and chemokines also modulate central nervous system (CNS) function in the absence of overt immunological, physiological, or psychological challenges.[14]

There is now sufficient data to conclude that immune modulation by psychosocial stressors and/or interventions can lead to actual health changes. Although changes related to infectious disease and wound healing have provided the strongest evidence to date, the clinical importance of immunological dysregulation is highlighted by increased risks across diverse conditions and diseases. For example, stressors can produce profound health consequences. In one epidemiological study, all-cause mortality increased in the month following a severe stressor the death of a spouse.[15] Theorists propose that stressful events trigger cognitive and affective responses which, in turn, induce sympathetic nervous system and endocrine changes, and these ultimately impair immune function.[16][17] Potential health consequences are broad, but include rates of infection[18][19] HIV progression[20][21] cancer incidence and progression,[15][22][23] and high rates of infant mortality.[24][25]

Stress is thought to affect immune function through emotional and/or behavioral manifestations such as anxiety, fear, tension, anger and sadness and physiological changes such as heart rate, blood pressure, and sweating. Researchers have suggested that these changes are beneficial if they are of limited duration,[16] but when stress is chronic, the system is unable to maintain equilibrium or homeostasis.

In one of the earlier PNI studies, which was published in 1960, subjects were led to believe that they had accidentally caused serious injury to a companion through misuse of explosives.[26] Since then decades of research resulted in two large meta-analyses, which showed consistent immune dysregulation in healthy people who are experiencing stress.

In the first meta-analysis by Herbert and Cohen in 1993,[27] they examined 38 studies of stressful events and immune function in healthy adults. They included studies of acute laboratory stressors (e.g. a speech task), short-term naturalistic stressors (e.g. medical examinations), and long-term naturalistic stressors (e.g. divorce, bereavement, caregiving, unemployment). They found consistent stress-related increases in numbers of total white blood cells, as well as decreases in the numbers of helper T cells, suppressor T cells, and cytotoxic T cells, B cells, and Natural killer cells (NK). They also reported stress-related decreases in NK and T cell function, and T cell proliferative responses to phytohaemagglutinin [PHA] and concanavalin A [Con A]. These effects were consistent for short-term and long-term naturalistic stressors, but not laboratory stressors.

In the second meta-analysis by Zorrilla et al. in 2001,[28] they replicated Herbert and Cohen's meta-analysis. Using the same study selection procedures, they analyzed 75 studies of stressors and human immunity. Naturalistic stressors were associated with increases in number of circulating neutrophils, decreases in number and percentages of total T cells and helper T cells, and decreases in percentages of Natural killer cell (NK) cells and cytotoxic T cell lymphocytes. They also replicated Herbert and Cohen's finding of stress-related decreases in NKCC and T cell mitogen proliferation to Phytohaemagglutinin (PHA) and Concanavalin A (Con A).

More recently, there has been increasing interest in the links between interpersonal stressors and immune function. For example, marital conflict, loneliness, caring for a person with a chronic medical condition, and other forms on interpersonal stress dysregulate immune function.[29]

Release of corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) from the hypothalamus is influenced by stress.

Furthermore, stressors that enhance the release of CRH suppress the function of the immune system; conversely, stressors that depress CRH release potentiate immunity.

Glutamate agonists, cytokine inhibitors, vanilloid-receptor agonists, catecholamine modulators, ion-channel blockers, anticonvulsants, GABA agonists (including opioids and cannabinoids), COX inhibitors, acetylcholine modulators, melatonin analogs (such as Ramelton), adenosine receptor antagonists and several miscellaneous drugs (including biologics like Passiflora edulis) are being studied for their psychoneuroimmunological effects.

For example, SSRIs, SNRIs and tricyclic antidepressants acting on serotonin, norepinephrine and dopamine receptors have been shown to be immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory against pro-inflammatory cytokine processes, specifically on the regulation of IFN-gamma and IL-10, as well as TNF-alpha and IL-6 through a psychoneuroimmunological process.[32][33][34] Antidepressants have also been shown to suppress TH1 upregulation.[32][33][34][35][36]

Tricyclic and dual serotonergic-noradrenergic reuptake inhibition by SNRIs (or SSRI-NRI combinations), have also shown analgesic properties additionally.[37][38] According to recent evidences antidepressants also seem to exert beneficial effects in experimental autoimmune neuritis in rats by decreasing Interferon-beta (IFN-beta) release or augmenting NK activity in depressed patients.[12]

These studies warrant investigation for antidepressants for use in both psychiatric and non-psychiatric illness and that a psychoneuroimmunological approach may be required for optimal pharmacotherapy in many diseases.[39] Future antidepressants may be made to specifically target the immune system by either blocking the actions of pro-inflammatory cytokines or increasing the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines.[40]

Extrapolating from the observations that positive emotional experiences boost the immune system, Roberts speculates that intensely positive emotional experiences sometimes brought about during mystical experiences occasioned by psychedelic medicinesmay boost the immune system powerfully. Research on salivary IgA supports this hypothesis, but experimental testing has not been done.[41]

Here is the original post:
Psychoneuroimmunology - Wikipedia

Obstetrics & Gynecology

The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University is a comprehensive clinical service and educational department, specializing in the healthcare of women both on a primary and referral basis. We provide quality clinical services in following areas: General Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Oncology, Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Reproductive Endocrinology, Infertility, and Genetics, and Urogynecology and Pelvic Surgery.

General Obstetrics and Gynecology provides a full range of general obstetrical and gynecological services ranging from outpatient care to surgery, and from routine visits to complicated consultations. In addition to normal obstetrical and gynecological services, our specialized research and interest areas include urodynamics, dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, pelvic pain, menopause, and others.

See original here:
Obstetrics & Gynecology

History of neuroscience – Wikipedia

From the ancient Egyptian mummifications to 18th century scientific research on "globules" and neurons, there is evidence of neuroscience practice throughout the early periods of history. The early civilizations lacked adequate means to obtain knowledge about the human brain. Their assumptions about the inner workings of the mind, therefore, were not accurate. Early views on the function of the brain regarded it to be a form of "cranial stuffing" of sorts. In ancient Egypt, from the late Middle Kingdom onwards, in preparation for mummification, the brain was regularly removed, for it was the heart that was assumed to be the seat of intelligence. According to Herodotus, during the first step of mummification: "The most perfect practice is to extract as much of the brain as possible with an iron hook, and what the hook cannot reach is mixed with drugs." Over the next five thousand years, this view came to be reversed; the brain is now known to be the seat of intelligence, although colloquial variations of the former remain as in "memorizing something by heart".

The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, written in the 17th century BC, contains the earliest recorded reference to the brain. The hieroglyph for brain, occurring eight times in this papyrus, describes the symptoms, diagnosis, and prognosis of two patients, wounded in the head, who had compound fractures of the skull. The assessments of the author (a battlefield surgeon) of the papyrus allude to ancient Egyptians having a vague recognition of the effects of head trauma. While the symptoms are well written and detailed, the absence of a medical precedent is apparent. The author of the passage notes "the pulsations of the exposed brain" and compared the surface of the brain to the rippling surface of copper slag (which indeed has a gyral-sulcal pattern). The laterality of injury was related to the laterality of symptom, and both aphasia ("he speaks not to thee") and seizures ("he shutters exceedingly") after head injury were described. Observations by ancient civilizations of the human brain suggest only a relative understanding of the basic mechanics and the importance of cranial security. Furthermore, considering the general consensus of medical practice pertaining to human anatomy was based on myths and superstition, the thoughts of the battlefield surgeon appear to be empirical and based on logical deduction and simple observation.[1][2]

During the second half of the first millennium BC, the Ancient Greeks developed differing views on the function of the brain. However, due to the fact that Hippocratic doctors did not practice dissection, because the human body was considered sacred, Greek views of brain function were generally uninformed by anatomical study. It is said that it was the Pythagorean Alcmaeon of Croton (6th and 5th centuries BC) who first considered the brain to be the place where the mind was located. According to ancient authorities, "he believed the seat of sensations is in the brain. This contains the governing faculty. All the senses are connected in some way with the brain; consequently they are incapable of action if the brain is disturbed...the power of the brain to synthesize sensations makes it also the seat of thought: The storing up of perceptions gives memory and belief and when these are stabilized you get knowledge."[2] In the 4th century BC Hippocrates, believed the brain to be the seat of intelligence (based, among others before him, on Alcmaeon's work). During the 4th century BC Aristotle thought that, while the heart was the seat of intelligence, the brain was a cooling mechanism for the blood. He reasoned that humans are more rational than the beasts because, among other reasons, they have a larger brain to cool their hot-bloodedness.[3]

In contrast to Greek thought regarding the sanctity of the human body, the Egyptians had been embalming their dead for centuries, and went about the systematic study of the human body. During the Hellenistic period, Herophilus of Chalcedon (c.335/330280/250 BC) and Erasistratus of Ceos (c. 300240 BC) made fundamental contributions not only to brain and nervous systems' anatomy and physiology, but to many other fields of the bio-sciences. Herophilus not only distinguished the cerebrum and the cerebellum, but provided the first clear description of the ventricles. Erasistratus used practical application by experimenting on the living brain. Their works are now mostly lost, and we know about their achievements due mostly to secondary sources. Some of their discoveries had to be re-discovered a millennium after their death.[2]

During the Roman Empire, the Greek anatomist Galen dissected the brains of sheep, monkeys, dogs, swine, among other non-human mammals. He concluded that, as the cerebellum was denser than the brain, it must control the muscles, while as the cerebrum was soft, it must be where the senses were processed. Galen further theorized that the brain functioned by movement of animal spirits through the ventricles. "Further, his studies of the cranial nerves and spinal cord were outstanding. He noted that specific spinal nerves controlled specific muscles, and had the idea of the reciprocal action of muscles. For the next advance in understanding spinal function we must await Bell and Magendie in the 19th Century."[2][3]

Andreas Vesalius noted many structural characteristics of both the brain and general nervous system during his dissections of human cadavers.[4] In addition to recording many anatomical features such as the putamen and corpus collusum, Vesalius proposed that the brain was made up of seven pairs of 'brain nerves', each with a specialized function. Other scientists including Leonardo da Vinci furthered Vesalius' work by adding their own detailed sketches of the human brain. Ren Descartes also studied the physiology of the brain, proposing the theory of dualism to tackle the issue of the brain's relation to the mind. He suggested that the pineal gland was where the mind interacted with the body after recording the brain mechanisms responsible for circulating cerebrospinal fluid.[5]Thomas Willis studied the brain, nerves, and behavior to develop neurologic treatments. He described in great detail the structure of the brainstem, the cerebellum, the ventricles, and the cerebral hemispheres.

The role of electricity in nerves was first observed in dissected frogs by Luigi Galvani in the second half of the 18th century. In the 1820s, Jean Pierre Flourens pioneered the experimental method of carrying out localized lesions of the brain in animals describing their effects on motricity, sensibility and behavior. Richard Caton presented his findings in 1875 about electrical phenomena of the cerebral hemispheres of rabbits and monkeys. Studies of the brain became more sophisticated after the invention of the microscope and the development of a staining procedure by Camillo Golgi during the late 1890s that used a silver chromate salt to reveal the intricate structures of single neurons. His technique was used by Santiago Ramn y Cajal and led to the formation of the neuron doctrine, the hypothesis that the functional unit of the brain is the neuron. Golgi and Ramn y Cajal shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1906 for their extensive observations, descriptions and categorizations of neurons throughout the brain. The hypotheses of the neuron doctrine were supported by experiments following Galvani's pioneering work in the electrical excitability of muscles and neurons. In the late 19th century, Emil du Bois-Reymond, Johannes Peter Mller, and Hermann von Helmholtz showed neurons were electrically excitable and that their activity predictably affected the electrical state of adjacent neurons.

In parallel with this research, work with brain-damaged patients by Paul Broca suggested that certain regions of the brain were responsible for certain functions.[6]

Neuroscience during the twentieth century began to be recognized as a distinct unified academic discipline, rather than studies of the nervous system being a factor of science belonging to a variety of disciplines.

Broca's hypothesis was supported by observations of epileptic patients conducted by John Hughlings Jackson, who correctly deduced the organization of motor cortex by watching the progression of seizures through the body. Carl Wernicke further developed the theory of the specialization of specific brain structures in language comprehension and production. Modern research still uses the Korbinian Brodmann's cytoarchitectonic (referring to study of cell structure) anatomical definitions from this era in continuing to show that distinct areas of the cortex are activated in the execution of specific tasks.[6]Eric Kandel and collaborators have cited David Rioch, Francis O. Schmitt, and Stephen Kuffler as having played critical roles in establishing the field.[7] Rioch originated the integration of basic anatomical and physiological research with clinical psychiatry at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, starting in the 1950s. During the same period, Schmitt established a neuroscience research program within the Biology Department at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, bringing together biology, chemistry, physics, and mathematics. The first freestanding neuroscience department (then called Psychobiology) was founded in 1964 at the University of California, Irvine by James L. McGaugh. Kuffler started the Department of Neuroscience at Harvard Medical School in 1966.

Read the original here:
History of neuroscience - Wikipedia

Biochemistry

Welcome to the home page of one of the fastest growing departments of biochemistry in the U.S., where our faculty have developed superb educational and research programs. Learn more about our department.

Charles Brenner, PhD Chair and DEO, Department of Biochemistry

Read more:
Biochemistry

ST genetics

Females calving heifers in their first two pregnancies produce up to 981 lbs. more milk over the two lactations than females calving back-to-back males.

(Hinde K, et al, (2014), Holsteins Favor Heifers, Not Bulls: Biased Milk Production Programmed during Pregnancy as a Function of Fetal Sex. PLoS ONE 9(2): e86169. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0086169)

See the article here:
ST genetics