Morphological Studies of Prolactin-Secreting Cells in Estrogen Receptor α and Estrogen Receptor β Knockout Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estrogens play a major role in the regulation of prolactin (PRL) secretion through activation of pituitary and hypothalamic estrogen receptors (ERs). In order to evaluate the relative role of ERalpha and ERbeta in the control of PRL density in the pituitary gland, we performed immunocytochemical localization of PRL and ERs in pituitaries of wild-type (WT), ERalpha knockout (KO) and ERbetaKO mice. In WT and ERbetaKO anterior pituitaries, the vast majority of secretory cells contained ERalpha immunoreactivity, while no ERalpha immunostaining could be found in ERalphaKO pituitaries. No ERbeta immunoreactivity could be detected in pituitaries of WT, ERalphaKO or ERbetaKO mice. At the light microscopic level, a large number of cells staining for PRL were present in pituitaries of female WT, while in female ERalphaKO pituitaries, the density of PRL cells was much lower. In WT male pituitaries, the density of PRL cells was lower than observed in female WT, while PRL staining was markedly decreased in male ERalphaKO as compared to male WT. In ERbetaKO mice of both sexes, the results were identical to those observed in WT animals. At the electron microscopic level, in WT mice of both sexes, type 1 PRL cells exhibited a well-developed Golgi apparatus and a large number of strongly stained large mature and immature secretory granules. Type 2 PRL cells were also present in the pituitary. Type 2 PRL cells contain small poorly labelled granules. In ERalphaKO mice of both sexes, type 1 PRL cells were atrophied with poorly developed Golgi apparatus, and no type 2 PRL cells could be observed. In ERalphaKO pituitaries, typical gonadectomy cells were found. No ultrastructural changes were observed in PRL cells of ERbetaKO mice. The present data strongly suggest that the positive regulation of PRL expression at the pituitary level by estrogens is mediated by ERalpha and does not involve ERbeta activation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".