Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T09:23:26.614Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of anti-PMSG on distribution of estrogen receptor alpha and progesterone receptor in mouse ovary, oviduct and uterus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2014

Zi Li Lin
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Korea.
He Min Ni
Affiliation:
College of Animal Science and Technology, Beijing University of Agriculture, Beijing, China.
Yun Hai Liu
Affiliation:
College of Animal Science and Technology, Beijing University of Agriculture, Beijing, China.
Xi Hui Sheng
Affiliation:
College of Animal Science and Technology, Beijing University of Agriculture, Beijing, China.
Xiang Shun Cui
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Korea.
Nam Hyung Kim
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Korea.
Yong Guo*
Affiliation:
College of Animal Science and Technology, Beijing University of Agriculture, Beijing, China.
*
All correspondence to: Yong Guo. College of Animal Science and Technology, Beijing University of Agriculture, Beijing, China. Tel: +86 10 80799133. Fax: +86 10 80799468. e-mail: y63guo@126.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

It is well established that estrogen and progesterone are critical endogenous hormones that are essential for implantation and pregnancy in females. However, the distribution of estrogen receptor α (ERα) and progesterone receptor (PR) in female reproductive tracts is elusive. Herein, we report that after serial treatments with pregnant mare's serum gonadotrophin (PMSG) with or without anti-PMSG (AP), mice could regulate the distribution of ERα and PR in the murine ovary, oviduct and uterus and the level of estradiol in serum. ERα and PR regulation by PMSG and anti-PMSG was estrous cycle-dependent and critical for promoting the embryo-implantation period. Furthermore, our results suggested that AP-42 h treatment is more effective than the other treatments. In contrast, other treatment groups also affected the distribution of ERα and PR in mouse reproductive tracts. Thus, we found that anti-PMSG has the potential to restore the distribution of ERα and PR, which could effectively reduce the negative impact of residual estrogen caused by the normal superovulation effect of PMSG in mice.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 
Figure 0

Figure 1 Model of the experimental design. Based on different treatments, 40 mice (body weight, 60–65 g) were divided into four groups: (1) PMSG group: five female mice were injected s.c. with 10 IU PMSG; (2) AP-36 h group: five female mice were injected s.c. with 10 IU PMSG, then injected s.c. with 10 IU anti-PMSG after 36 h; (3) AP-42 h group: five female mice were injected s.c. with 10 IU PMSG, then injected s.c. with 10 IU anti-PMSG after 42 h. All the animals were killed by cervical dislocation at 48 h after the first injection; and (4) AP-48 h group: five female mice were injected s.c. with 10 IU PMSG, then injected s.c. with 10 IU anti-PMSG after 48 h, the animals were killed by cervical dislocation after 52 h.

Figure 1

Figure 2 Roles of ERα and PR on PMSG and anti-PMSG induction in the ovary of female mouse (n = 5). Detection of ERα (A1) and PR (A2) in different groups by immunohistochemistry. 1. PMSG group, 2. AP-36 h group, 3. AP-42 h group, 4. AP-48 h group. Scale bar, 200 μm. Positive characteristics are shown by arrowheads. FA: Follicular antrum, CO: Cumulus oophorus, PO: Primary oocyte, SG: Stratum granulosum. The expression intensity and average absorbance of ERα (B1, C1) and PR (B2, C2) in the ovarian follicles (x ± s). (D) Western blot showing expression of ERα or PR after different treatments. Data are expressed as least square mean ± SEM. Values with different superscripts are significantly different, P < 0.05.

Figure 2

Figure 3 Role of ERα and PR on PMSG and anti-PMSG induction in the oviduct. Detection of ERα (A1) and PR (A2) in different groups by immunohistochemistry. (1) PMSG group; (2) AP-36 h group; (3) AP-42 h group; (4) AP-48 h group. Scale bar, 200 μm. Positive characteristics are indicated by arrowheads. LP: Lamina propria, EM: Epithelium mucosae, CML: Circular muscle layer. Comparison of intensity and average absorbance of ERα (B1, C1) and PR (B2, C2) by immunohistochemistry in the oviduct after different treatments. (D) Western blot showing expression of ERα or PR in different groups. Data are expressed as least square mean ± SEM. Values with different superscripts are significantly different, P < 0.05.

Figure 3

Figure 4 Role of ERα and PR on PMSG and anti-PMSG induction in the uterus. Detection of ERα (A1) and PR (A2) in different groups by immunohistochemistry. (1) PMSG group; (2) AP-36 h group; (3) AP-42 h group; (4) AP-48 h group. Scale bar, 200 μm. Positive characteristics are indicated by arrowheads. GE: Glandular epithelium, LE: Luminal epithelium, S: Endometrial stroma. The intensity and average absorbance of ERα (B1, C1) and PR (B2, C2) in the endometrial stroma, luminal epithelium and glandular epithelium of uterus (x ± s). (D) Western blot showing expression of ERα or PR after different treatments. Data are expressed as least square mean ± SEM. Values with different superscripts are significantly different, P < 0.05.

Figure 4

Figure 5 Serum estradiol (E2) levels were measured in different treatment groups. Statistically significant differences (P < 0.05) are indicated by different superscripts. Values are the means ± standard error of the mean (SEM) of three independent experiments.