4.7 Article

The role of Kisspeptin-GPR54 signaling in the tonic regulation and surge release of gonadotropin-releasing hormone/luteinizing hormone

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 27, 期 44, 页码 12088-12095

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2748-07.2007

关键词

arcuate nucleus; kisspeptin; kiss1; LH surge; AVPV; kiss1R

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [R01 HD27142, U54 HD12629] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Kiss1 gene codes for kisspeptin, which binds to GPR54, a G-protein-coupled receptor. Kisspeptin and GPR54 are expressed in discrete regions of the forebrain, and they have been implicated in the neuroendocrine regulation of reproduction. Kiss1-expressing neurons are thought to regulate the secretion of gonadotropin-releasing hormone ( GnRH) and thus coordinate the estrous cycle in rodents; however, the precise role of kisspeptin-GPR54 signaling in the regulation of gonadotropin secretion is unknown. In this study, we used female mice with deletions in the GPR54 gene [GPR54 knock-outs ( KOs)] to test the hypothesis that kisspeptin-GPR54 signaling provides the drive necessary for tonic GnRH/luteinizing hormone ( LH) release. We predicted that tonic GnRH/LH secretion would be disrupted in GPR54 KOs and that such animals would be incapable of showing a compensatory rise in LH secretion after ovariectomy. As predicted, we found that GPR54 KO mice do not exhibit a postovariectomy rise in LH, suggesting that tonic GnRH secretion is disrupted in the absence of kisspeptin-GPR54 signaling. We also postulated that kisspeptin-GPR54 signaling is critical for the generation of the estradiol ( E)induced GnRH/LH surge and thus E should be incapable of inducing an LH surge in the absence of GPR54. However, we found that E induced Fos expression in GnRH neurons and produced a GnRH-dependent LH surge in GPR54 KOs. Thus, in mice, kisspeptin-GPR54 signaling is required for the tonic stimulation of GnRH/LH secretion but is not required for generating the E-induced GnRH/LH surge.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据