PSIV-17 Identification of two stem cell types derived from porcine testicular cell culture: germline stem cells and progenitor Leydig cells.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Male germline stem cells (mGSCs) offer great promises in regenerative medicine and animal breeding because of their potential to become pluripotent stem cells (PSCs). However, the pluripotency and origin of these testis-derived stem cells remain controversial. To better characterize testis-derived stem cells, we isolated and cultured porcine mGSCs, and identified two different types of testis-derived stem cells (termed as C1 and C2) during porcine testicular cell culture, even though they shared many overlay markers. To determine which of these cell populations represent mGSCs, we compared their morphology, expression of pluripotency-associated markers, and differentiation capacity to sperm and other lineages in vitro. The C1 clusters appeared morphologically similar to the previously described mouse mGSCs, expressed pluripotency- and germ cell-associated markers, and displayed alkaline phosphatase activity. They also maintained the paternal imprinted pattern of H19 methylation and differentiated to sperms in vitro. Together, these data suggest that the C1 clusters represent the porcine mGSC population. Conversely, the C2 clusters appeared similar to the previously described porcine mGSCs and expressed Leydig cell lineage and mesenchymal cell-specific markers. They exhibited the capacity to differentiate into testosterone-producing Leydig cells, and cells of the adipogenic and osteogenic lineages in vitro, demonstrating that they are progenitor Leydig cells. Collectively, we identified two types of porcine testis-derived stem cells, mGSCs and progenitor Leydig cells. We found for the first time that, the C2, equivalent to previously claimed porcine mGSCs, are actually progenitor Leydig cells (PLCs). These findings provide new insights into the discrepancies among previous reports and future identification and analyses of testis-derived stem cells.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".