4.3 Article

Infertility with defective spermatogenesis and steroidogenesis in male mice lacking androgen receptor in Leydig cells

Journal

ENDOCRINE
Volume 32, Issue 1, Pages 96-106

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12020-007-9015-0

Keywords

androgen receptor; leydig cell; steroidogenesis; spermatogenesis

Funding

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK60948] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Androgen and the androgen receptor (AR) have been shown to play critical roles in male fertility. Our previous data demonstrated that mice lacking AR (AR(-/y)) revealed incomplete germ cell development and lowered serum testosterone levels, which resulted in azoospermia and infertility. However, the consequences of AR loss in Leydig cells remain largely unknown. Using a Cre-LoxP conditional knockout strategy, we generated a tissue-specific knockout mouse (L-AR(-/y)) with the AR gene deleted by the anti-Mullerian hormone receptor-2 (Amhr2) promoter driven Cre expressed in Leydig cells. Phenotype analyses show that the outside appearance of L-AR(-/y) mice was indistinguishable from wild type mice (AR(+/y)), but with atrophied testes and epididymis. L-AR(-/y) mice were infertile, with spermatogenic arrest predominately at the round spermatid stage and no sperm could be detected in the epididymis. L-AR(-/y) mice also have lower serum testosterone concentrations and higher serum leuteinizing hormone and follicle-stimulating hormone concentrations than AR(+/y) mice. Further mechanistic studies demonstrated that hypotestosteronemia in L-AR(-/y) mice is not caused by reducing numbers of Leydig cells, but instead by the alterations of several key steroidogenic enzymes, including 17 beta-HSD3, 3 beta-HSD6, and P450c17. Together, L-AR(-/y) mice provide in vivo evidence that functional AR in Leydig cells is essential to maintain normal spermatogenesis, testosterone production, and required for normal male fertility.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available