- Award ID(s):
- 1642385
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10042189
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Human Brain Mapping
- Volume:
- 38
- Issue:
- 12
- ISSN:
- 1065-9471
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 6185 to 6205
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
Abstract Stress represents a multi‐faceted force that is central for the evolution of life. Organisms evolve while adapting to stress and stressful contexts often represent selective bottlenecks. To understand stress effects on biological systems and corresponding coping strategies it is imperative to properly define stress and the resulting strain that triggers compensatory responses in cells and organisms. Here I am deriving such definitions for biological systems based on principles that are established in physics. The relationship between homeostasis of critical biological variables, the elastic limit, the cellular stress response (CSR), cellular homeostasis response (CHR), system dysregulation, and the breaking point (death of the system) is outlined. Dysregulation of homeostatic set‐points of biological variables perturbs the functional properties of the system, shifting them out of the evolutionarily optimized range. Such shifts are accompanied by elevated rates of macromolecular damage, which represents a nonspecific signal for induction of a universal response, the CSR. The CSR complements the CHR in re‐establishing homeostasis of the system as a whole. Moreover, the CSR is essential for coping with suboptimal conditions while the system is in a dysregulated state and for removing excessive damage that accumulates during such periods. The extreme complexity of biological systems and their emergent properties often necessitate monitoring stress effects on many biological variables simultaneously to properly deduce stress effects on the system as a whole. Therefore, increased utilization of systems biology (omics) approaches for characterizing cellular and organismal stress responses facilitates the reductionist dissection of biological stress response mechanisms.
-
Abstract Background Psychological stress is prevalent among reproductive‐aged men. Assessment of semen quality for epidemiological studies is challenging as data collection is expensive and cumbersome, and studies evaluating the effect of perceived stress on semen quality are inconsistent.
Objective To examine the association between perceived stress and semen quality.
Material and methods We analyzed baseline data on 644 men (1,159 semen samples) from two prospective preconception cohort studies during 2015–2021: 592 in Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO) and 52 in SnartForaeldre.dk (SF). At study entry, men aged ≥21 years (PRESTO) and ≥18 years (SF) trying to conceive without fertility treatment completed a questionnaire on reproductive and medical history, socio‐demographics, lifestyle, and the 10‐item version of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS; interquartile range [IQR] of scores: 0–40). After enrollment (median weeks: 2.1, IQR: 1.3–3.7), men were invited to perform in‐home semen testing, twice with 7–10 days between tests, using the Trak Male Fertility Testing System. Semen quality was characterized by semen volume, sperm concentration, and total sperm count. We fit generalized estimating equation linear regression models to estimate the percent difference in mean log‐transformed semen parameters by four PSS groups (<10, 10–14, 15–19, ≥20), adjusting for potential confounders.
Results The median PSS score and IQR was 15 (10–19), and 136 men (21.1%) had a PSS score ≥20. Comparing men with PSS scores ≥20 with <10, the adjusted percent difference was −2.7 (95% CI: −9.8; 5.0) for semen volume, 6.8 (95% CI: ‐10.9; 28.1) for sperm concentration, and 4.3 (95% CI: −13.8; 26.2) for total sperm count.
Conclusion Our findings indicate that perceived stress is not materially associated with semen volume, sperm concentration, or total sperm count.
-
There seems to be a basic misconception in several recent papers concerning the material symmetry of bodies in configurations that are pre-stressed. In this short paper we point to the source of the error and show that the material symmetry that is possible depends on the nature of the pre-stress. We also extend the results for material symmetry which have been well known within the context of simple elastic solids to the general class of simple materials. This generalization has relevance to the material symmetry of biological solids that are viscoelastic.more » « less