Oxidative Stress Disrupted Prepubertal Rat Testicular Development after Xenotransplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the past two decades, testicular tissue grafting and xenografting have been well established, with the production of fertilization-competent sperm in some studies. However, few studies have been carried out to observe the development of grafted prepubertal testicular tissue of rats and compare the biological differences between in situ testis and grafted testis. In this study, we established the prepubertal testicular tissue xenografting model using a 22-day-old rat and evaluated certain parameters, including testicular histology, testosterone production, and ultrastructure of the grafted testes. We also assessed gene expression of cell proliferation markers, testicular cell markers, and antioxidative defense system. Our results showed that 47 days after transplantation, intratesticular testosterone concentration was not significantly altered; however, cell proliferation, spermatogenesis, and Sertoli cell markers in the transplanted testes were significantly disrupted compared with the control group, accompanied by aggravated apoptosis and oxidative damage. Moreover, the transplanted testes showed smaller tubular diameter and disrupted spermatogenic epithelium with apparent vacuoles, distorted and degenerated germ cells with obscure nuclear margin, and no spermatids in the center of the tubules. Although testis xenografting has been extensively tested and attained great achievement in other species, the prepubertal rat testicular tissue xenografting to immunodeficient mice exhibited obvious spermatogenesis arrest and oxidative damage. The protocol still needs further optimization, and there are still some unknown factors in prepubertal rat testes transplantation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".