MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594860815 · doi:10.1093/biolreprod/85.s1.42

Regulation of Spermatogonial Stem Cells by MicroRNAs.

2011· article· en· W2594860815 on OpenAlexaff
Zuping He, Jiji Jiang, Maria Kokkinaki, Lin Tang, Ina Dobrinski, Martin Dym

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Reproduction · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologymicroRNAStem cellCaenorhabditis elegansSmall RNACell biologyCellular differentiationDNA microarrayGeneGeneticsComputational biologyGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) have recently been identified as a new class of short single-stranded endogenous RNA molecules (~22 nt in length). Although miRNAs were first discovered in Caenorhabditis elegans in 1993, it was only 10 years ago that they were identified in mammals. MiRNAs are highly conserved across species and it has been estimated that miRNAs may regulate up to 30% of all genes in the human genome. MiRNAs have critical functions in many diverse biological processes, including the regulation of stemness, cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis. The miRNA 17-92 cluster has been suggested to play important roles in regulating renewal and/or differentiation of stem cells, including in ES cells and in other adult stem cells. However, the function of miRNAs in regulating spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs) is still unknown. In this study, we explored the expression, the role, and the targets of the miRNA 17-92 cluster in SSCs, specifically miRNA-20, miRNA-106a, and miRNA-93. Real-time PCR and fluorescent in situ hybridization revealed that miRNA-20 and miRNA-106a were abundantly expressed in mouse SSCs (GFRA1+ spermatogonia), whereas their expression decreased significantly in the differentiated c-kit+ spermatogonia, suggesting that miRNA-20 and miRNA-106a play a role in regulating renewal of the SSCs. MiRNA-93 was significantly lower in the SSCs compared to the differentiated spermatogonia, suggesting that miRNA-93 regulates differentiation. Using miRNA microarrays, we identified a list of miRNAs that were enriched in the SSCs compared to non-stem cells, e.g., Let-7G and Let-7I. To identify cell phenotype and genes regulated by a particular miRNA, we used mimics to miRNA-20, miRNA-106a, and miRNA-93, both in vitro and in vivo. The miRNA mimics are chemically synthesized RNA designed to mimic individual endogenous mature miRNAs. The mimics enter the miRNA-processing pathway and are treated identical to their endogenous counterpart. Semi-quantitative RT-PCR demonstrated that miRNA-20 and miRNA-106a mimics increased expression of PCNA and Plzf mRNA in the SSCs. In contrast, miRNA-20 and miRNA-106a inhibitors induced the expression of c-kit mRNA. These results further suggest that miRNA-20 and miRNA-106a may be involved in renewal of SSCs. Using software prediction and an in vitro study, we demonstrated that Stat3 is a target of miRNA-20 and miRNA-106a. We next examined the role of these miRNAs in vivo using mimics transfected into the GFRA1+ SSCs. These miRNA-transfected stem cells were then transplanted into seminiferous tubules of sterile busulfan treated mice. The miRNA-20 and miRNA-106a mimics increased significantly the number of SSCs in the testes of the busulfan treated mice, compared to controls, when analyzed by immunohistochemistry after 60 days. Our study provides novel insights into the endogenous small RNA molecules that regulate SSCs and has important implications on offering new therapeutic targets for the treatment of male infertility as well as a novel approach for the treatment of male contraception. (platform)

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of ReproductionSame topicMicroRNA in disease regulationFrench-language works237,207