Self-renewal and differentiation of rat epididymal basal cells using a novel in vitro organoid model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The epididymis is composed of a pseudostratified epithelium that is comprised of various cell types. Studies have shown that rat basal cells share common properties with adult stem cells and begin to differentiate in vitro in response to fibroblast growth factor and 5α-dihydrotestosterone. The characterization of rat basal cells is therefore necessary to fully understand the role of these cells. The objectives of this study were to assess the ability of single basal cells to develop organoids and to assess their ability to self-renew and differentiate in vitro. We isolated basal cells from the rat epididymis and established three-dimensional cell cultures from the basal and nonbasal cell fractions. Organoids were formed by single adult epididymal basal cells. Organoids were dissociated into single basal cells, which were able to reform new organoids, and were maintained over 10 generations. Long-term culture of organoids revealed that these cells could be differentiated into cells expressing the principal cell markers aquaporin 9 and cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator. Electron microscopy demonstrated that organoids were composed of several polarized cell types displaying microvilli and the ability to form tight junctions. Additionally, organoids could be formed by basal cells from either the proximal or distal region of the epididymis and are able to secrete clusterin, a protein implicated in the maturation of spermatozoa. These data indicate that rat basal cells can be used to derive epididymal organoids and further support that notion that these may represent a stem cell population in the epididymis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".