Circulating and Luminal Testicular Factors Affect LRP‐2 and Apo J Expression in the Epididymis Following Efferent Duct Ligation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Apolipoprotein J (clusterin or sulfated glycoprotein-2) has been shown to be secreted by the epididymal principal cells, whereupon it binds to sperm in the lumen. Apolipoprotein J also is endocytosed by principal cells along the epididymis. Recently, it has been demonstrated that low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein-2 (LRP-2) mediates the endocytosis of Apo J and is present in the epididymis. The purpose of the present study was to determine the factors regulating the synthesis of these 2 proteins in various experimentally treated animals. The epididymides of adult rats were fixed with Bouin's fluid and examined with anti-Apo J and anti-LRP-2 antibodies by a light microscope immunocytochemical method. In normal adult animals, expression of Apo J was evident in principal cells of all epididymal regions except the proximal initial segment. Diffuse cytoplasmic staining indicated Apo J secretion. Reactive apical vesicles, presumably endosomal in nature, suggested endocytosis of Apo J. Lipoprotein receptor-related protein-2 expression was solely apical in nature and was seen as an intense apical band in principal cells of all regions except the proximal and distal initial segment and distal caput regions of the epididymis. Hypophysectomy, up to 28 days after the procedure, did not affect expression of Apo J or LRP-2 in principal cells along the entire epididymis. Orchidectomy, with or without testosterone replacement at all time intervals examined, also did not affect LRP-2 expression along the entire epididymis. This also was noted for Apo J expression in all regions except the proximal initial segment. Thus, expression of these 2 proteins does not appear to be regulated by testicular or pituitary factors. In contrast, bilateral as well as unilateral (intact and ligated sides) efferent duct ligation resulted in dramatic differences in LRP-2 and Apo J expression in principal cells in the various epididymal regions. In the case of LRP-2, a complete absence of reaction was noted in principal cells along the entire epididymis. As for Apo J, expression in the distal initial segment, intermediate zone, and caput region remained unchanged compared with that in normal adult animals, whereas in the corpus and cauda epididymides, results of cytoplasmic staining were negligible. These results suggest that under conditions of efferent duct ligation, a circulating factor emanates from the testis to inhibit expression of LRP-2 and Apo J in these epididymal regions. Furthermore, because Apo J was affected in a region-specific manner, unlike the case for LRP-2, different factors appear to be involved for each protein. These factors may be produced to inhibit proteins from being synthesized by the epididymis in the absence of luminal testicular input and may exist in cases of congenital and pathologic epididymal tubule blockages as well as after vasectomy. In the case of immunostaining for Apo J in the proximal initial segment only, normally unreactive principal cells in control adult animals became intensely reactive after orchidectomy as well as bilateral and unilateral (ligated side only) ligation. As this was not the case for hypophysectomized animals and the intact side of unilateral efferent duct-ligated animals, it is suggested that a testicular factor entering via the lumen of the efferent ducts serves to inhibit Apo J expression in this area. The present data also reveal that after efferent duct ligation, there are circulating factors that inhibit Apo J expression in a region-specific manner (corpus and cauda) and that inhibit LRP-2 expression along the entire epididymis and that these are derived from the testis. Furthermore, the data reveal that a testicular luminal factor appears to inhibit Apo J expression in the proximal initial segment of normal adult animals. Key words: Principal cells, orchidectomy, glycoprotein 330, clusterin, sulfated glycoprotein-2.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».