A combined approach facilitates the reliable detection of human spermatogonia in vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION: Does a combined approach allow for the unequivocal detection of human germ cells and particularly of spermatogonia in vitro? SUMMARY ANSWER: Based on our findings, we conclude that an approach comprising: (i) the detailed characterization of patients and tissue samples prior to the selection of biopsies, (ii) the use of unambiguous markers for the characterization of cultures and (iii) the use of biopsies lacking the germ cell population as a negative control is the prerequisite for the establishment of human germ cell cultures. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The use of non-specific marker genes and the failure to assess the presence of testicular somatic cell types in germ cell cultures may have led to a misinterpretation of results and the erroneous description of germ cells in previous studies. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Testicular biopsies were selected from a pool of 264 consecutively obtained biopsies. Based on the histological diagnosis, biopsies with distinct histological phenotypes were selected (n = 35) to analyze the expression of germ cell and somatic cell markers. For germ cell culture experiments, gonadotrophin levels and clinical data were used as selection criteria resulting in the following two groups: (i) biopsies with qualitatively intact spermatogenesis (n = 4) and (ii) biopsies from Klinefelter syndrome Klinefelter patients lacking the germ cell population (n = 3). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Quantitative real-time PCR analyses were performed to evaluate the specificity of 18 selected germ cell and 3 somatic marker genes. Cell specificity of individual markers was subsequently validated using immunohistochemistry. Finally, testicular cell cultures were established and were analyzed after 10 days for the expression of germ cell- (UTF1, FGFR3, MAGE A4, DDX4) and somatic cell-specific markers (SMA, VIM, LHCGR) at the RNA and the protein levels. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Interestingly, only 9 out of 18 marker genes reflected the presence of germ cells and cell specificity could be validated using immunohistochemistry. Furthermore, VIM, SMA and LHCGR were found to reflect the presence of testicular somatic cells at the RNA and the protein levels. Using this validated marker panel and biopsies lacking the germ cell population (n = 3) as a negative control, we demonstrated that germ cell cultures containing spermatogonia can be established from biopsies with normal spermatogenesis (n = 4) and that these cultures can be maintained for the period of 10 days. However, marker profiling has to be performed at regular time points as the composition of testicular cell types may continuously change under longer term culture conditions. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: There are significant differences regarding the spermatogonial stem cell (SSC) system and spermatogenesis between rodents and primates. It is therefore possible that marker genes that do not reflect the presence of spermatogonia in the human are specific for spermatogonia in other animal models. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: While some studies have reported that human SSCs can be maintained in vitro and show characteristics of pluripotency, the germ cell origin and the differentiation potential of these cells were subsequently called into question. This study provides critical insights into possible sources for the misinterpretation of results regarding the presence of germ cells in human testicular cell cultures and our findings can therefore help to avoid conflicting reports in the future. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This project was supported by the Stem Cell Network North Rhine-Westphalia and the Innovative Medical Research of the University of Münster Medical School (Grant KO111014). In addition, it was funded by the DFG-Research Unit FOR 1041 Germ Cell Potential (GR 1547/11-1 and SCHL 394/11-2), the BMBF (01GN0809/10) and the IZKF (CRA 03/09). The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
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".