Interleukin-10 and its receptors at the maternal–conceptus interface: expression, regulation, and implication for T helper 2 cytokine predominance and maternal immune tolerance in the pig, a true epitheliochorial placentation species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The appropriate balance between pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines is important for the maternal immune tolerance during pregnancy in mammals. Among the various cytokines, interleukin (IL)-10 (IL10) plays an essential role in anti-inflammatory responses, while IL12 is involved in pro-inflammatory responses during pregnancy. However, the roles of IL10 and IL12 in the endometrium during pregnancy have not been studied in pigs. Thus, we investigated the expression of IL10, IL12 (IL12A and IL12B), and their receptors (IL10RA, IL10RB, IL12RB1, and IL12RB2) at the maternal-conceptus interface. IL10, IL12, and their receptors were expressed in the endometrium during the estrous cycle and pregnancy in a pregnancy stage-specific manner. During pregnancy, IL10 expression increased on Day 15, whereas the expression of IL12A and IL12B decreased after the implantation period. IL10 protein was localized to luminal epithelial (LE), stromal cells, and macrophages; IL10RA protein to LE, endothelial, stromal, and T cells; and IL10RB mRNA to LE cells in the endometrium. IL10 and IL10RA proteins and IL10RB mRNA were also localized to chorionic epithelial (CE) cells. In endometrial explants, the expression of IL10RA and IL10RB was induced by estradiol-17β, IL-1β, and/or interferon-γ. Heme oxygenase 1, an IL10-inducible factor, was expressed in the endometrium with the highest levels on Day 30 of pregnancy and was localized to LE and CE cells. These results in pigs suggest that conceptus-derived signals change the endometrial immune environment by regulating the expression of IL10 and IL10 receptors at the maternal-conceptus interface and that IL10 may provide anti-inflammatory conditions for the maternal immune tolerance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".