Multiple cell types in the oviduct express the prolactin receptor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about the physiological role of prolactin in the oviduct. Examining mRNA for all four isoforms of the prolactin receptor (PRLR) in mice by functional oviduct segment and stage of the estrous cycle, we found short form 3 (SF3) to be the most highly expressed, far exceeding the long form (LF) in highly ciliated areas such as the infundibulum, whereas in areas of low ciliation, the SF3 to LF ratio was ~1. SF2 expression was low throughout the oviduct, and SF1 was undetectable. Only in the infundibulum did PRLR ratios change with the estrous cycle. Immunofluorescent localization of SF3 and LF showed an epithelial (both mucosal and mesothelial) distribution aligned with the mRNA results. Despite the high SF3/LF ratio in densely ciliated regions, these regions responded to an acute elevation of prolactin (30 min, intraperitoneal), with LF-tyrosine phosphorylated STAT5 seen within cilia. Collectively, these results show ciliated cells are responsive to prolactin and suggest that prolactin regulates estrous cyclic changes in ciliated cell function in the infundibulum. Changes in gene expression in the infundibulum after prolonged prolactin treatment (7-day) showed prolactin-induced downregulation of genes necessary for cilium development/function, a result supporting localization of PRLRs on ciliated cells, and one further suggesting hyperprolactinemia would negatively impact ciliated cell function and therefore fertility. Flow cytometry, single-cell RNAseq, and analysis of LF-td-Tomato transgenic mice supported expression of PRLRs in at least a proportion of epithelial cells while also hinting at additional roles for prolactin in smooth muscle and other stromal cells.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".