Differential gene expression profiles of human efferent ducts and proximal epididymis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gene expression patterns along the epididymis are established by specific transcription factor networks that coordinate region-specific functions. In rodents, the epididymis can be divided in up to 19 segments. Based on gross anatomy, the human epididymis is divided into caput, corpus, and cauda segments together with efferent ducts that occupy the proximal part of this organ. OBJECTIVES: To determine to which extent gene expression pattern is segmented along the efferent ducts and the proximal region of the epididymis in men of reproductive age. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Epididymal transcriptome profiling was performed on eight distinct regions from three donors. Microarray analysis was performed on a gene-chip microarray. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs)>2-fold change (P < .05) were clustered in relation to their intensity profiles. Overrepresented biological functions from gene ontology were searched using DAVID 6.8. Expression profiles were validated by qRT-PCR quantification of selected genes. RESULTS: There were no DEGs among segments 1-3 of efferent ducts region neither among segments 4-6 of the caput epididymis. 1058 DEGs were identified between efferent ducts and the epididymis, whereas 444 and 846 DEGs distinguished the caput from the corpus (section 7) and cauda (section 8) epididymis, respectively. A total of 131 DEGs were detected between corpus (7) and cauda (8) transcriptomes. Up-regulated DEGs in the efferent ducts were predominantly related to cilium assembly/movement and cell differentiation. Fertilization, defense, and immune responses were associated with caput epididymis (4-6), while spermatogenesis and protein binding were found all along the epididymis (4-8). DISCUSSION: The proximal human epididymis is exclusively occupied by efferent ducts with a distinct DEG profile compared with the downstream epididymal segments. Moreover, gene expression profiling revealed two regions in the human epididymis: the caput and the distal corpus/cauda region. CONCLUSIONS: Human epididymal transcriptome reveals limited DEGs, and efferent ducts have a distinct DEGs profile.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".