4.5 Article

Effect of estrogen receptor-subtype-specific ligands on fertility in adult male rats

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 225, 期 3, 页码 169-180

出版社

BIOSCIENTIFICA LTD
DOI: 10.1530/JOE-15-0045

关键词

estradiol; estrogen receptor; male fertility; selective ligands

资金

  1. National Institute for Research in Reproductive Health (NIRRH) [RA/179/08-2014]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Maintenance of normal male fertility relies on the process of spermatogenesis which is under complex endocrine control by mechanisms involving gonadotropin and steroid hormones. Although testosterone is the primary sex steroid in males, estrogen is locally produced in the testis and plays a very crucial role in male fertility. This is evident from presence of both the estrogen receptors alpha (ER alpha) and beta (ER beta) in the testis and their absence, as in the case of knockout mice models, leads to sterility. The present study was undertaken to understand individual roles of the two ERs in spermatogenesis and their direct contribution towards the maintenance of male fertility using receptor-subtype-specific ligands. Administration of ER alpha and beta agonists to adult male rats for 60 days results in a significant decrease in fertility, mainly due to an increase in pre- and post-implantation loss and a concomitant decrease in litter size and sperm counts. Our results indicate that ER alpha is mainly involved in negative feedback regulation of gonadotropin hormones, whereas both ERs are involved in regulation of prolactin and testosterone production. Histological examinations of the testis reveal that ER beta could be involved in the process of spermiation since many failed spermatids were observed in stages IX-XI following ER beta agonist treatment. Our results indicate that overactivation of estrogen signaling through either of its receptors can have detrimental effects on the fertility parameters and that the two ERs have both overlapping and distinct roles in maintenance of male fertility.

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

4.5
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