Talk:Folliculogenesis

Untitled

The labels in the folliculogenesis diagram (Folliclesinovary.jpg) are incorrect - they have been reversed.

The arrow is pointing in the wrong direction
"Corpus albicans" should be "Primary follicle"
"Mature corpus luteum" should be "Secondary follicle"
"Corpus luteum" should be "Graafian follicle" or "Mature vesicular follicle"
etc.

I have already e-mailed the contact person at the National Cancer Institute (the source of this image as listed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Folliclesinovary.jpg)

Stefan

I agree, this needs to be changed. Plus the titles of the other two pictures "Histological presentation of...." are incorrect these are not histological pictures they are schematic diagrams. Janette

Fair use rationale for Image:Mature Graffian follicle.jpg

Image:Mature Graffian follicle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Length of Folliculogenesis

It says that folliculogenesis, from the time of a primordial follicle up to the point it becomes a dominant follicle, last for 375 days, equivalent to about 13 menstrual cycles. I'm not sure if this is verified, and most literature I've read tend to either describe the length of folliculogenesis as (i) only spanning from the conclusion of the last luteal phase (i.e. when FSH rises again with the decay of the corpus luteum several days prior to menses) and therefore being ~2 weeks long, or (ii) occuring over 3-4 menstrual cycles and therefore 3-4 months long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.191.36.219 (talk) 16:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Secondary/tertiary follicle

In the following sentences, is stated that both follicular stages are defined by appearance of the antrum.

"The acquisition of antrum marks the graduation of the primary follicle to the secondary follicle."

"The tertiary follicle, also known as a Graafian follicle or antral follicle, is marked by the formation of a fluid-filled cavity adjacent to the oocyte called the antrum."

Furthermore, according to < Junqueira's Basic Histology: Text & Atlas, 12e > the secondary follicle is also called an antral follicle, not the tertiary, as stated in the article.

" (...) the antrum (Figures 22–3 and 22–7a), producing follicles now called secondary or antral follicles." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.243.175.125 (talk) 16:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Folliculogenesis in adult individuals

Since this paper PMID 22366948 it appears that it's not clear some statements about a closed number of folicles an its involvement in menopausia. Please, let's seek an expert to make it clear.--Gustavocarra (talk) 17:09, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

timeline for folliculogenesis

Please refer to Fig. 2 in Endocrine Reviews 21(2): 200–214. According to this paper, even if you assume that the primordial to primary follicle transition is one day long, the overall time from this transition to ovulation is greater than 7 menstrual cycles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.158.254.202 (talk) 15:51, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

= Another way of showing question

Look at image 3, this is declared a secondary follicle with an approximate diameter of 0.2mm. That is 1/1000 of the 2cm length in 4cm x 3cm x 2cm given as an adult ovary size here on the page on ovary. This is less than ten times larger than size of a primordial follicle at 0.03mm. For the simplification of math lets say that the primordial follicle was even smaller being .02mm. That would make it 1/10,000 of the lesser length in the size of an adult ovary. That gives you the dimensions of 2/10,000 x 1.5/10,000 x 1/10,000 of an ovary being the size of a primordial follicle. This yields the possibility of less than 30,000 total primordial follicles(being that they are actually .03 - .05mm in diameter) in an adult ovary if it contained solely primordial follicles. It does not however. Therefor, I conclude it to be mathematically impossible for an ovary to contain this primordial follicle cell count, and I postulate that they are actually formed inside the ovary just as with spermatogenesis. Do the math your self if you don't believe. Also try using V=(4/3)πr³ for volume and obtain a total volume of 1,000,000 primordial follicles (or 500,000 as per ovary) and then work backwards to gain a minimum required radius of such a volume r = ³√((V÷(4/3))÷π). You will find the same error in cell count of primordial follicles related to required radial size if the ovary's dimensions were adjusted to a sphere shape 3x3x3. (Crlinformative (talk) 03:53, 30 March 2016 (UTC))

Referenced information

Being that no one seems to be watching this page I will give it a day or so and change the information I have bolded on the page regarding the incorrect information given. Crlinformative (talk) 23:49, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Folliculogenesis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050916222651/http://www.endotext.org/female/female1/femaleframe1.htm to http://www.endotext.org/female/female1/femaleframe1.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080926031705/http://www2.ufp.pt/~pedros/qfisio/reproduction.htm to http://www2.ufp.pt/~pedros/qfisio/reproduction.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:53, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Menstruating while ovulating

Tell me something about it Cause some women experience menses while ovulating

Comments please 💔 Babemoma (talk) 11:16, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Lots of mixed up terminology here.

There is no general agreement what defines the various stages (phases?) of the follicle. There seems to be significant agreement that the first three are primordial, primary, and secondary. After that it becomes Babel. Late Secondary, Antral, Graafian, Tertiary - mix and match them however you want. (Well, no. Tertiary - if it exists - is after "late secondary" and before Graafian (if *that* exists) in any usage I've run across. {post-add: I neglected to mention pre-antral and pre-ovulatory!} But "antral" may or may not be regarded as a distinct stage - the antrum is the void which coalesces from smaller spaces and persists until ovulation/rupture. So, it's a poor measure of the 'progress' of the follicle. BUT it is an *easily* observable marker, hence an easy descriptor (of microscopic observations/photos/slides). WP can't clarify the literature when the literature isn't clear. Authors disagree. I note that WP solves similar problems by *imposing* a specific set of definitions from, usually, a single authoritative source (even if, or especially if, other good sources have different terms or worse yet the same terms but different definitions). My guess is that isn't feasible here simply because the literature is too mixed making the authors' meaning(s) impossible (infeasible) to untangle. Three other things: 1.) I've seen it stated in several sources (mostly WP) that initial recruitment occurs long before the ovulatory event the oocytes are recruited for. I've seen "the better part of a year" and "210 days" among other examples. I don't see that here. Why the heck not?? 2.) The diagram "Diagram of Folliculogenesis..." sucks. What does it show? It's a mess. First, it CLAIMS to be "starting from late-secondary" but on the left shows >120 days plus BEFORE the "pre-antral" FSH/LH spike in the "1st cycle". I know what "starting" means; it's not this! There are numerous other faults in the diagram. Why, for instance are there 4 (count 'em! 4!) timelines that start and continue to the far right? (Actually, with the FSH/LH graph insert, that makes 5 timelines!!!). Why does these lines become dotted? What's up with the blue boxes? Why are some follicles given sizes and others aren't. What does a size mean if attached not to a drawn follicle, but to a blue box? Why is "early antral" show no antrum? Why is the "Selected" blue box 4 times the length (in time) of the blue "selection window"?? There are 9 drawn follicles. Only 4 have a description. Why?! (in for a penny, in for a pound: I'll also point out that the first graphic, "Order of Changes.." is also confused. ① Menstruation (in pink, seriously??) isn't attached to anything in the ovary. Why is it there? It suggests menstruation occurs IN SEQUENCE, FIRST BEFORE (2) Developing Follicle!!!!! Absotutely WRONG! It should be removed (and the changes renumbered).) 3.) There are at birth, about 1-2 million follicles. The article claims that 0.1% of them undergo ovulation (and therefore 99.9% do not. Let me do the math, since the editors seem unable to: 0.1% = 0.001 and 1,500,000 x 0.001 = 1,500. Yeah, no - that's over 100 yrs worth (at 13/yr). IF we allow that there are ~500,000 at puberty, then 0.1% of those is 500 which is ~38.5 yrs which is about right. People, get your acts together. Please.~2026-29044-21 (talk) 15:58, 25 June 2026 (UTC)