| Literature DB >> 11455896 |
A Meikle1, E G Garófalo, M Rodríguez-Piñón, C Tasende, L Sahlin.
Abstract
The regulation of estrogen and progesterone receptor (ER, PR) expression by estradiol (E2) and progesterone (P4) in the oviduct, uterus and cervix of female lambs was studied. The animals received three intramuscular injections of E2, P4 or vehicle with an interval of 24 h and they were slaugthered 24 h after the third injection. Determinations of ER and PR were performed by binding assays and mRNAs of ER alpha and PR by solution hybridization. High levels of ER and PR in both cervix and oviduct were found in the female lamb, differing from other mammalian species. No significant effects by either E2 or P4 treatment on ER and PR levels in the cervix and oviduct could be observed. E2 treatment increased the mRNA levels of ERa and PR more than 3-fold in the cervix, while P4 treatment increased the mRNA levels of ERa and PR in the uterus. The results show differential effects of gonadal steroids on sex steroid receptor expression along the reproductive tract in female lambs, suggesting that steroid target tissues can modulate responses to the same circulating levels of steroid hormones.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2001 PMID: 11455896 PMCID: PMC2202335 DOI: 10.1186/1751-0147-42-161
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Vet Scand ISSN: 0044-605X Impact factor: 1.695
Figure 2Levels of mRNA of A) estrogen receptor α (ERα mRNA) and B) progesterone receptor (PR mRNA) in the cervix, oviduct and uterus of 2 months old lambs after i.m. injections of oil (Group C), estradiol (Group E) or progesterone (Group P). The results are presented as percentages of Group C. Bars (least square mean ± SEM) with different superscripts are significantly different (P < 0.05).
Figure 1Concentrations (fmol/mg protein) by ligand-binding assay of A) estrogen (ER) and B) progesterone (PR) receptor in the cervix and oviduct of 2 months old lambs after i.m. injections of oil (Group C), estradiol (Group E) or progesterone (Group P). The bars represent least square mean ± SEM. There were no significant differences between the treatments.