Circulating and Luminal Testicular Factors Affect LRP‐2 and Apo J Expression in the Epididymis Following Efferent Duct Ligation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".