Tubulobulbar complexes facilitate basal junction turnover in the seminiferous epithelium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tubulobulbar complexes (TBCs) are cytoskeleton‐related structures that develop at sites of intercellular attachment in the seminiferous epithelium. It is increasingly evident that TBCs found apically in the epithelium play a role in junction internalization, but much less is known about TBCs that form at basal junction complexes. To test the hypothesis that the complexes facilitate basal junction turnover events, we demonstrate that they do form basally in rat Sertoli cells in primary cultures. Morphologically intact tight and gap junctions are observed in basal TBCs in rats. In addition, immunological probes for three types of junction proteins react with linear structures at the light level that we interpret as TBCs, and probes for EEA1 and Rab5 react in similar locations. Significantly, fluorescence staining patterns for actin and claudin‐11 indicate that the amount of junction present is greatly reduced over the time period that TBCs are known to be most prevalent during spermatogenesis. We use transfection techniques on cultured Sertoli cells to show that basal TBCs likely internalize ‘intact’ junctions. On the basis of our findings we present a new model for basal junction remodeling as it relates to spermatocyte translocation in the seminiferous epithelium. Supported by an NSERC Discovery Grant to AWV. Grant Funding Source : NSERC Discovery Grant
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".