Regulation of Cell Types Within Testicular Organoids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organoids are 3-dimensional (3D) structures grown in vitro that emulate the cytoarchitecture and functions of true organs. Therefore, testicular organoids arise as an important model for research on male reproductive biology. These organoids can be generated from different sources of testicular cells, but most studies to date have used immature primary cells for this purpose. The complexity of the mammalian testicular cytoarchitecture and regulation poses a challenge for working with testicular organoids, because, ideally, these 3D models should mimic the organization observed in vivo. In this review, we explore the characteristics of the most important cell types present in the testicular organoid models reported to date and discuss how different factors influence the regulation of these cells inside the organoids and their outcomes. Factors such as the developmental or maturational stage of the Sertoli cells, for example, influence organoid generation and structure, which affect the use of these 3D models for research. Spermatogonial stem cells have been a focus recently, especially in regard to male fertility preservation. The regulation of the spermatogonial stem cell niche inside testicular organoids is discussed in the present review, as this research area may be positively affected by recent progress in organoid generation and tissue engineering. Therefore, the testicular organoid approach is a very promising model for male reproductive biology research, but more studies and improvements are necessary to achieve its full potential.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".