O objetivo deste trabalho foi verificar a presença e a localização de receptores para hormônios esteróides e gonadotróficos, através da técnica de imunohistoquímica, pelo método de peroxidase-antiperoxidase (PAP), nos diferentes tecidos que compõe o trato genital da égua e a variação de reatividade destes receptores durante o ciclo estral e no anestro fisiológico. Também se objetivou verificar se há diferença de reatividade em éguas com e sem endometrose. Foram coletadas amostras de útero, cérvice e oviduto, de 41 éguas sem raça definida e com histórico reprodutivo desconhecido, em um abatedouro. Quinze éguas se encontravam em estro, dezoito em diestro e oito éguas em anestro. Concluiu-se que a intensidade e a distribuição da coloração para os receptores de estrógeno (RE), progesterona (RP) e hormônio luteinizante (RLH) variaram de acordo com o tipo de célula e o estágio do ciclo estral. Nas amostras de endométrio observou-se imunorreatividade alta no epitélio luminal para RE e RP tanto no estro quanto no diestro; o epitélio glandular, estroma e miométrio mostraram reatividade moderada para os dois receptores durante as duas fases. Durante o anestro os resultados foram semelhantes aos encontrados durante a fase cíclica. Na avaliação da reatividade para RLH, durante o estro e diestro, o epitélio luminal mostrou reatividade de fraca a moderada, mas no diestro houve maior reatividade média. O epitélio glandular apresentou menor reatividade do que o luminal. No miométrio a coloração foi fraca durante todo o ciclo. Durante o anestro a reatividade foi fraca no epitélio luminal, ausente em quase todas as amostras no epitélio glandular e de fraca a ausente no miométrio. Neste experimento, não foi observada diferença significativa de reatividade entre os endométrios com e sem endometrose, mas as áreas afetadas mostraram coloração assíncrona para RE, RP e RLH. Na cérvice, foi observada imunorreatividade moderada a alta para RE e RP no epitélio luminal, no estroma e no músculo. A intensidade de coloração das células epiteliais e musculares variou pouco entre o estro e o diestro, mas durante o anestro houve maior reatividade no tecido muscular e no estroma. Foi observada reatividade para RLH no epitélio e camada muscular, sem variação significativa nas fases do ciclo. A intensidade de coloração foi de fraca a moderada no epitélio e fraca na camada muscular. No oviduto, observou-se imunorreatividade para RE e RP nos três tecidos, durante a fase cíclica e o anestro. No epitélio, os valores encontrados foram de moderados a altos, sem variação significativa nas três fases. A coloração das células epiteliais do oviduto foi nitidamente irregular, com o núcleo muito corado no que parecem ser células secretoras e pouco corado ou sem coloração nas células ciliadas, refletindo provavelmente as diferentes funções das células epiteliais neste órgão. No estroma a reatividade foi moderada durante a fase luteal, mostrando reatividade mais alta no estro e no anestro. A camada muscular apresentou reatividade máxima para RE no estro e no diestro. A reatividade para RLH no epitélio luminal foi de fraca a moderada durante todo o ciclo. No músculo também foi observada reatividade, porém bem mais fraca do que no epitélio. Durante o anestro somente três das oito amostras apresentaram reatividade no tecido muscular. No diestro foi observada maior reatividade do que no estro. Os resultados do presente estudo evidenciam, pela primeira vez, a presença de receptores para LH nos diferentes tecidos do trato reprodutor extragonadal da égua. Embora existam relatos da expressão e localização de RE e RP no endométrio equino, esta é a primeira vez que se utiliza a técnica de imunohistoquímica para localizar estes receptores na cérvice e no oviduto desta espécie. Foi observada variação individual bastante acentuada entre as amostras, em uma mesma fase cíclica. Provavelmente estes resultados sejam o reflexo da variação entre o dia do ciclo em que os animais se encontravam, bem como da complexidade dos mecanismos envolvidos na presença desses receptores. Os achados deste estudo indicam que tanto os hormônios gonadais quanto o LH atuam por meio de seus receptores nos diferentes tecidos do trato reprodutivo da égua, podendo servir para a elaboração de novas estratégias para melhorar a eficiência reprodutiva nesta espécie. / The aim of this study was to demonstrate the presence and localization of gonadotropic and steroid hormone receptors, in different tissues of the mare genital tract and the different reactivity to these receptors during the endometrial cycle and physiologic anestrus. Another objective was to compare the reactivity to theses receptors in mares with and without endometrosis. Immunohistochemistry was performed using the peroxidase anti-peroxidase technique (PAP). Uterus, cervix and oviduct of 41 criollo mares were collected in an abattoir. There was variation in the intensity of the staining and distribution for estrogen receptors (PR), progesterone receptors (PR) and luteinizing hormone receptors (LHR) with the endometrial cycle and different tissues. The endometrial surface epithelial cells were stained strongly for ER and PR in the estrous and dioestrus; glandular epithelial cells, stromal cells and smooth muscle cells of the myometrium had moderate staining for ER and PR during these two phases and in anestrus too. The immunoreactive score for LHR in the surface epithelial cells during endometrial cycle was weak to moderate but, in general, strong staining was observed in dioestrus. More weak staining intensity was observed in the glandular epithelial cells than luminal epithelial cells. Smooth muscle cells of the myometrium showed weak staining for LHR throughout the endometrial cycle. During the anestrus, the immunoreactivity score was weak in the surface epithelial cells. In general, the glandular epithelium was not stained. Myometrium cells were weak to not staining for LHR, in this phase. In this study there was no significant difference in immunoreactive score for ER, PR and LHR in endometrium with or without endometrosis but fibrotic glands showed different expression patterns of ER, PR and LHR, could evidence for functionally glandular maldifferentiation in endometrosis. The cervical epithelial surface, stromal cells and smooth muscle cells were moderate to strongly staining for ER and PR, with little variation throughout the endometrial cycle but the immunorectivity was strongest during the anestrus in muscular and stromal cells. Surface epithelial cells of cervix were weak to moderate stained for LHR; smooth muscle cells showed weak staining for these receptors. There was no variation during cycle. In the oviduct, epithelial, stromal and muscle cells showed reactivity for RE and RP, during cycle and anestrus. Epithelial cells were moderate to strongly staining for these receptors, with evident irregularity in different types of cells. Apparently ciliated epithelial cells were stained but the intensity was much less than that observed in nonciliated epithelial cells, probably reflecting different functions of these cells. Stromal cells showed moderate staining during dioestrus and strongest reactivity in estrous and anestrus; muscle cells showed strong reactivity for ER throughout the cycle. The reactivity for LHR was weak to moderate throughout the cycle in the epithelial cells and weak in the muscle cells. During anestrus only three strains of muscle cells showed reactivity for LHR. In dioestrus the intensity was strongest. These findings evidence for the firs time the presence for LHR in extra-gonadal reproductive organs of mare. Though there were reports of ER and PR expression in equine endometrium, this is the first report of localization of these receptors in cervix and oviduct of mare using immunohistochemistry. It was found marked individual variation among the strains. These results probably were caused by the variation among the day of cycle and the complexity of mechanisms involved in the presence of these receptors. The findings of the present study allow us to infer that the ovarian steroid hormones nad LH function through their receptors in different tissues of mare reproductive tract, can help us to elaborate new strategies to improve the reproductive efficiency in this specie.

Ovarian cancer is thought to be derived from the ovarian surface epithelium (OSE), but it is often diagnosed during the late stages and therefore the events that contribute to the initiation and progression of ovarian cancer are poorly defined. Epidemiological studies have indicated an association between the female reproductive hormones and ovarian cancer etiology, but the direct effects of 17β-estradiol (E2), progesterone (P4), luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) on disease pathophysiology are not well understood. A novel transgenic mouse model of ovarian cancer was generated that utilized the Cre/loxP system to inducibly express the oncogene SV40 large and small T-Antigen in the OSE. The tgCAG-LS-TAg mice developed poorly differentiated ovarian tumours with metastasis and ascites throughout the peritoneal space. Although P4 had no effect; E2 significantly accelerated disease progression in tgCAG-LS-TAg mice. The early onset of ovarian cancer was likely mediated by E2’s ability to increase the areas of putative preneoplastic lesions in the OSE. E2 also significantly decreased survival time in ovarian cancer cell xenografts. Microarray analysis of the tumours revealed that E2 mainly affects genes involved in angiogenesis and cellular differentiation, proliferation, and migration. These results suggest that E2 acts on the tumour microenvironment in addition to its direct effects on OSE and ovarian cancer cells. In order to examine the role of the gonadotropins in ovarian cancer progression, the tgCAG-LS-TAg mice were treated with 4-vinylcyclohexene-diepoxide (VCD) to induce menopause. Menopause slowed the progression of ovarian cancer due to a change in the histological subtype from poorly differentiated tumours to Sertoli tumours. Using a transgenic mouse model, it was shown that E2 accelerated ovarian cancer progression, while P4 had little effect on the disease. Menopause (elevated levels of LH and FSH) altered the histological subtype of the ovarian tumours in the tgCAG-LS-TAg mouse model. These results emphasize the importance of generating animal models to accurately recapitulate human disease and utilizing these models to develop novel prevention and treatment strategies for women with ovarian cancer.

The control of prolactin secretion is a complex interaction of peptides and neurotransmitters acting either in an inhibitory or stimulating way to effect final secretion of this hormone from the lactotrope cell in the anterior hypothalamus. These factors may act either directly on the lactotrope cell or indirectly by changing either dopamine restraint of prolactin secretion or by modulating peptide substances or neurotransmitters higher up in the hypothalamus. Gonadal steroids may also modulate the effect of peptides or dopamine at the level of the lactotrope. Prolactin's major role in the female rat is one of milk production post - partum, nurturing the young. It probably also has other physiological functions and may play a part in the menstrual cycle although this is controversial. Certainly, pulsatile secretion of prolactin during the menstrual cycle is well established and in the luteal phase this is concomitant with the secretion of luteinizing hormone. Theories explaining the synchronous surges seen during this phase of the menstrual cycle have been proposed and GnRH has been implicated in the genesis of the concordance of these secretory spikes. Using a potent GnRH antagonist an experiment was undertaken to establish the role of GnRH by blocking this hypothalamic peptide and observing the effect that this had on luteinizing hormone, prolactin and follicle stimulating hormone. In the first part of the thesis the control of prolactin secretion is reviewed. In the following section, an experiment was performed using a potent GnRH antagonist. A dose response curve was established for the antagonist action on LH. Then a twice maximum dose of this peptide was administered to three subjects in the midluteal phase of the menstrual cycle and the response of LH, prolactin and FSH was measured. The results indicate that although the GnRH antagonist significantly blocked LH secretory peaks, this action was not observed for either prolactin or FSH. This result is perhaps at variance with previous data which suggested that GnRH was responsible for concordant secretory spikes of LH and prolactin in the midluteal phase of the menstrual cycle.

No description available.

Orientador: Guilherme de Paula Nogueira / Banca: José Luis Moraes Vasconcelos / Banca: Ciro Moraes Barros / Resumo: Seis novilhas Nelore tiveram seus ciclos estrais acompanhados durante diferentes estações do ano (outono n=11; inverno n=8; primavera n=9; verão n=9) com exames ultrassonográficos diários para contar e mensurar folículos ≥3mm. Amostras de sangue foram colhidas a cada 12h para hormônio luteinizante (LH) e progesterona (P4), e a cada 3h do estro até a ovulação para caracterizar o pico de LH. Cinco novilhas ovariectomizadas receberam 17β-estradiol (2μg/kg/p.v.) em cada estação, e amostras de sangue foram colhidas depois disso a cada 3h para quantificação de LH. A diferença percentual mensal ( %) do peso não variou entre as estações. A concentração média de P4 no ciclo estral foi maior (p=0,001) e o número de folículos menor (p=0,001) durante o outono (2,5±0,2ng/mL; 7,8±0,1) e verão (2,9±0,3ng/mL; 6,8±0,2) comparado com o inverno (1,4±0,2ng/mL; 9,6±0,3) e primavera (1,6±0,2ng/mL; 9,7±0,3). Durante o inverno houve mais ciclos estrais com três (5 de 8) e durante o verão somente ciclos com duas ondas foliculares (p=0,009). Como a secreção de LH não variou, apesar da variação sazonal na concentração de P4, e como houve correlação negativa entre os valores máximos de P4 e a variação percentual do fotoperíodo (p=0,0056; r = -0,4465), uma variação sazonal na sensibilidade das células luteínicas ao LH precisa ser avaliada. Nas novilhas ovariectomizadas, a concentração circanual de LH sem o estímulo de estradiol foi significante (p=0,0214). A resposta de LH ao tratamento de estradiol foi menor no verão (0,8±0,2ng/mL vs 1,3±0,5ng/mL). Nós supomos que existe variação sazonal na sensibilidade hipotalâmica ao estradiol. / Abstract: Six Nelore heifers had their estrous cycle followed during different seasons of the year (autumn n=11; winter n=8; spring n=9 and summer n=9) with daily ultrasonographic exams to count and measure follicles ≥3mm. Blood was collected every 12h for luteinizing hormone (LH) and progesterone (P4), and every 3h from estrus until ovulation to characterize the LH peak. Five ovariectomized heifers were injected with 17β-estradiol (2μg/kg/LW) every season and blood samples were collected thereafter at 3h intervals for LH quantification. The monthly body weight percentile difference ( %) did not vary between seasons. Average P4 concentration for the cycle was higher (p=0.001) and follicle number lower during autumn (2.5±.2ng/ml; 7.8±.1) and summer (2.9±.3ng/ml; 6.8±.2) (p=0.001) compared to winter (1.4±.2ng/ml; 9.6±.3) and spring (1.6±.2ng/ml; 9.7±.3). During winter there were more estrous cycles with three follicle waves (5 out of 8) and during summer only cycles with two follicular waves (p=0.009). As LH secretion did not vary despite seasonal variation in P4 concentration and as there was a negative correlation between higher P4 values and daily percentile variation of photoperiod ( %, p=0.0056; r= -0.4465), a seasonal variation in luteal cell sensitivity to LH needs to be evaluated. In the ovariectomized Nelore heifers, the LH circanual concentration without estradiol stimulus was significant (p=0.0214). The LH response to estradiol treatment was lower in summer (0.8±.2ng/ml vs 1.3±.5ng/ml). We hypothesize there exists seasonal variation in hypothalamic sensitivity to estradiol. / Mestre

Cheng Fu Yip Gheorghe. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 97-116). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Acknowledgement --- p.I / Abstract (in English) --- p.III / Abstract (in Chinese) --- p.V / Table of Content --- p.VII / Symbols and Abbreviations --- p.XII / Scientific Names --- p.XIV / List of Tables --- p.XV / List of Figures --- p.XVI / Chapter Chapter 1 --- General Introduction / Chapter 1.1 --- Gonadotropin / Chapter 1.1.1 --- Structure --- p.2 / Chapter 1.1.2 --- Function --- p.3 / Chapter 1.1.3 --- Regulation --- p.4 / Chapter 1.1.3.1 --- Neuroendocrine and endocrine regulation of GTHs --- p.4 / Chapter 1.1.3.1.1 --- Hypothalamic neuropeptides and neurotransmitters --- p.6 / Chapter 1.1.3.1.2 --- Gonadal steroids --- p.7 / Chapter 1.1.3.2 --- Paracrine regulation of GTH --- p.8 / Chapter 1.2 --- Activin / Chapter 1.2.1 --- Structure --- p.8 / Chapter 1.2.2 --- Function --- p.9 / Chapter 1.2.3 --- Regulation of activin activity --- p.12 / Chapter 1.2.3.1 --- Intracellular blockade of activin signaling by Smad7 --- p.12 / Chapter 1.2.3.2 --- Extracellular control of activin access --- p.13 / Chapter 1.2.3.2.1 --- Inhibin --- p.13 / Chapter 1.2.3.2.2 --- Activin-binding protein --- p.14 / Chapter 1.3 --- Follistatin / Chapter 1.3.1 --- Structure --- p.14 / Chapter 1.3.2 --- Function --- p.16 / Chapter 1.3.3 --- Regulation in the pituitary --- p.19 / Chapter 1.4 --- Objectives of the Present Study --- p.20 / Chapter Chapter 2 --- Cloning and Recombinant Production of Goldfish Follistatin / Chapter 2.1 --- Introduction --- p.24 / Chapter 2.2 --- Materials and Methods / Chapter 2.2.1 --- Reagents --- p.26 / Chapter 2.2.2 --- Animal --- p.26 / Chapter 2.2.3 --- Extraction of total RNA and reverse transcription --- p.27 / Chapter 2.2.4 --- Cloning of full-length cDNA encoding goldfish follistatin --- p.27 / Chapter 2.2.5 --- Sequencing of the cDNA --- p.29 / Chapter 2.2.6 --- Distribution of follistatin mRNA in different tissues --- p.29 / Chapter 2.2.7 --- Production of rgFS --- p.30 / Chapter 2.2.8 --- RT-PCR of the rgFS-positive clones --- p.34 / Chapter 2.2.9 --- Extraction of genomic DNA from rgFS-positive clones --- p.34 / Chapter 2.2.10 --- Functional analysis of rgFS --- p.35 / Chapter 2.2.11 --- Data Analysis --- p.37 / Chapter 2.3 --- Results / Chapter 2.3.1 --- Cloning and sequence analysis of goldfish follistatin --- p.37 / Chapter 2.3.2 --- Tissue distribution of follistatin mRNA in the goldfish --- p.39 / Chapter 2.3.3 --- Production and bioassay of rgFS --- p.43 / Chapter 2.4 --- Discussion --- p.47 / Chapter Chapter 3 --- Function and Regulation of Follistatin in the Goldfish Pituitary; Evidence for an Intrinsic Activin/Follistatin Regulatory Feedback Loop / Chapter 3.1 --- Introduction --- p.54 / Chapter 3.2 --- Materials and Methods / Chapter 3.2.1 --- Reagents --- p.57 / Chapter 3.2.2 --- Animals --- p.57 / Chapter 3.2.3 --- Primary culture of dispersed pituitary cells --- p.57 / Chapter 3.2.4 --- RNA extraction and reverse transcription --- p.58 / Chapter 3.2.5 --- Ovariectomy on pituitary follistatin expression --- p.5 9 / Chapter 3.2.6 --- Seasonal expression profile of follistatin --- p.59 / Chapter 3.2.7 --- Validation of semi-quantitative RT-PCR assays --- p.61 / Chapter 3.2.8 --- Real-time PCR for assay on follistatin and β-actin expression --- p.61 / Chapter 3.2.9 --- Data analysis --- p.63 / Chapter 3.3 --- Results / Chapter 3.3.1 --- Expression of follistatin in the goldfish pituitary --- p.64 / Chapter 3.3.2 --- Validation of semi-quantitative RT-PCR assay --- p.64 / Chapter 3.3.3 --- Activin regulation of pituitary follistatin --- p.64 / Chapter 3.3.4 --- Effects of sex steroids on pituitary follistatin expression --- p.69 / Chapter 3.3.5 --- Effect of GnRH on follistatin expression in the pituitary --- p.74 / Chapter 3.3.6 --- Effect of intracellular cAMP level on pituitary follistatin expression --- p.74 / Chapter 3.3.7 --- Seasonal variation profile of goldfish pituitary follistatin --- p.78 / Chapter 3.4 --- Discussion --- p.78 / Chapter Chapter 4 --- General Discussion / Chapter 4.1 --- Overview --- p.89 / Chapter 4.2 --- Contribution of the Present Study / Chapter 4.2.1 --- Cloning of full-length goldfish follistatin cDNA --- p.91 / Chapter 4.2.2 --- Establishment of stable cell line for expression of rgFS --- p.92 / Chapter 4.2.3 --- Evidence for the presence of intrinsic feedback loop of activin in the goldfish pituitary --- p.92 / Chapter 4.2.4 --- Modulation of follistatin expression in the pituitary by sex steroids --- p.93 / Chapter 4.2.5 --- Conclusions --- p.93 / Chapter 4.3 --- Future Prospects / Chapter 4.3.1 --- Production of rgFS --- p.95 / Chapter 4.3.2 --- Regulation of activin-follistatin system in the pituitary --- p.95 / Reference --- p.96

GPCRs, influencing myriads of cellular functions, are the members of the largest family of the membrane proteins. However, their structures and the signaling mechanisms still remain enigmatic. In case of the Glycoprotein Hormone Receptor (GpHR) family the structure-function relationship is less understood because of a large extra-cellular domain (ECD). This large ECD, consisting of Leucine Rich Repeats (LRRs) and membrane-proximal hinge region, is sufficient for specific binding to the hormone (Ascoli, Fanelli, & Segaloff, 2002), but for receptor activation, hormone binding is translated via a conformation wave starting at hinge region and relayed to the transmembrane domain. Several biochemical, immunological and molecular biological tools have been employed to elucidate the structure-function relationship of the hormones and their receptors. These studies also helped in deciphering some of the regions present in both the hormones and the receptors involved in maintaining the specificity of their interaction (Fan & Hendrickson, 2005; Fox, Dias, & Van Roey, 2001; Wu, Lustbader, Liu, Canfield, & Hendrickson, 1994). However, the complete understanding of the hormone‐receptor contact sites and mechanism of receptor activation are still an enigma. Understanding the molecular details of these phenomena can lead to the development of novel strategies of regulating hormone action or regulating receptor activation in a hormone independent manner. The crystal structure of FSHR ECD (amino acids 17-366) revealed that LRRs form a semicircular palm shaped structure with the C terminus region, designated as the hinge region, protruding out like a thumb. The hinge region, rather than being a separate functional unit, was found to be an integral part of the LRR domain, having two such repeats (LRR11 &12). LRR 11 is connected to LRR12 through a hairpin loop (amino acids 280-344) harboring the invariant sulfated tyrosine residue (sTyr) in YD/EY motif (X. Jiang et al., 2012). The heterodimeric hormones consisting of a common  subunit and a hormone specific  subunit, bind to the primary hormone binding site at LRR 4-6 as reported in the FSHR-FSH co crystal (Fan & Hendrickson, 2005). This primary binding of the hormone at LRR 4-6 creates a pocket (comprising of the residues P16α, L17α, F18α, F74α, L37β, Y39β, and P45β) in the hormone for secondary binding at sTyr residue. This interaction is proposed to initiate conformation change in the hinge region which further leads to FSHR activation (X. Jiang et al., 2012). Thus, the role of hinge region in GpHR activation got evolved from a linker to a switch, which decides the fate of the receptor activity (Agrawal & Dighe, 2009; Majumdar & Dighe, 2012). sTyr residue being conserved, presents itself as a potential player in activation mechanism of all the three receptors of the family (Bonomi, Busnelli, Persani, Vassart, & Costagliola, 2006; Kreuchwig, Kleinau, & Krause, 2013). Precise involvement of sTyr in GpHR activation is yet to be explored. The previous studies from the laboratory using the hinge region specific polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies established the unequivocal role of the hinge region in FSHR and TSHR activation (Agrawal & Dighe, 2009; Majumdar & Dighe, 2012). However, its function in LHR activation has not been conclusively established. Due to the unavailability of the structural information of LHR ECD/hinge, it is more difficult to study and explain the role of hinge region in LHR activation. The hormone independent signaling by point mutants of LHR also remains poorly understood. In the present study an attempt has been made to understand the role of the hinge region in LHR signaling and modulating role of LRRs in hinge mediated LHR activation. The present study was initiated with an overall objective of understanding the molecular details of LHR activation mechanism keeping hinge at the centre of the picture. To have clarity of this picture with a holistic view of the mechanism, multi-pronged approach was adopted. Initially, ScFvs against LHR hinge region were employed as tools to probe into the hormone‐receptor interactions. Antibodies against glycoprotein hormones and their receptors have often provided insights into the mechanism of hormone‐receptor interactions and signal transduction (Agrawal & Dighe, 2009; Dighe & Moudgal, 1983; Gadkari, Sandhya, Sowdhamini, & Dighe, 2007; Gadkari et al., 2007; Kene, Nalavadi, Dighe, Iyer, & Mahale, 2004; Majumdar, Railkar, & Dighe, 2012a, 2012b). In this study, Single chain Fragment variables (ScFvs) against the hinge region of LH receptor have been employed to understand the mechanism of receptor activation. The effects of LHR ScFvs on hCG-LHR interactions have been investigated and three of the ScFvs, JE10, JE4 and JG1 could bypass the hormone and activate the receptor directly, with JE10 being the most potent one. The effect on the signaling was specific for LHR as no increase in cAMP response was observed for TSHR/FSHR in presence of these ScFvs. JE10 surprisingly was unique and could alter the hCG-LHR interaction by decreasing hormone affinity and simultaneously increasing the Bmax for the hormone. JE10 binding was decreased to the pre-formed hormone receptor complex suggesting that hCG and the stimulatory antibody show stearic hindrance at the binding sites on hinge or hormone binding induces conformational change in the epitope of JE10. The change in affinity and Bmax of the hormone by JE10 could be due to unmasking of new binding sites for hormones or an allosteric effect on the protomer interaction like explained in case of a small TMD specific allosteric modulator of FSHR (Xuliang Jiang et al., 2014). JE10 could also potentiate hCG signaling at sub-saturating concentrations of hCG, the precise mechanism of which is not clear. Through TSHR-LHR chimeric mutants, a stretch from amino acids 313-349, within the hinge region, was identified as the site recognized by JE10. In order to study structural features of the JE10 epitope, LHR ECD was modeled on the basis of FSHRED crystal structure. With most of the motifs being structurally conserved (CF3 and YPSHCCAFF); the major portion of the hinge region was found to be unstructured. This unstructured region harbored the JE10 epitope as well as the functionally important conserved sTyr residue. The CD spectra of LHR hinge in presence of ScFv JE10 suggested a ScFv induced helical conformation and stabilization of the hinge loop region, which was constrained in the homology model into helices. As loop was now constrained in the Mode 2, so was the interaction of sTyr, which was now in contact with positively charged residues, probably stabilizing its charge. The YEY motif mutants further confirmed the indirect essential role of Y331 in activation of LHR by JE10. Another approach followed to study hCG-LHR interactions was use of a series of LHR N-terminal truncation mutants and truncation mutants along with one of the LHR CAM (S277Q/D578Y). The effect of these truncations on hormone binding and receptor activation was investigated. The deletion of Cysteine box (Cb-1) of LHR (present at N-terminus of ECD) leads to abrogation of hCG binding, indicating importance of this region in maintaining ECD conformation required for hormone binding. This is the most unexplored region of the ECD. Though Cb-1 does not bind to the hormone directly (as is evident from the crystal structure) but it is indirectly essential for hormone binding. The basal activity of these truncated mutants was as low as that of the wild type LHR, reconfirming that no region of LHR ECD acts as an inverse agonist for the TMD (Karges, Gidenne, Aumas, Kelly, & Milgrom, 2005). Truncation mutants with CAM (double mutants) also showed low basal activity, suggesting that intact ECD is prerequisite for keeping LHR in a conformation, best suited for hormone binding and binding of G protein for activation. That best conformation still needs to be explored. Truncation mutants did not get stimulated by JE10 also. This observation is opposite to the previous studies in which FSHR/TSHR truncated mutants could be stimulated by hinge specific antibodies (Agrawal & Dighe, 2009; Majumdar & Dighe, 2012). This difference points out to the variations in which LHR hinge-TMD interactions prevail and lead to the receptor activation. This variation was also confirmed with a previous report in which the binding of TSHR-ECL specific antisera to wild type LHR and TSHR-LHR 6 chimeric mutant suggested that hinge of LHR does not seem to be constraining the TMD (Majumdar et al., 2012b). Thus the LHR TMD itself possesses all the inhibitory interactions, also indicated by the presence of most of the activating mutations in LHR TMD (Piersma, Verhoef-post, Berns, & Themmen, 2007). Protomer interaction is the newest aspect of GpHR activation mechanism and has not reached any conclusive, physiologically relevant explanations yet. By co-transfection of wild type LHR and ECD truncated mutants, this study suggests the LHR protomer interaction and proposes the involvement of allosteric effect of ECD on LHR protomer interaction. The effect of JE10 on activating and inactivating mutants of LHR were quite interesting. The ScFv could bind to the activating mutant D578Y (associated with precocious puberty). This mutant exhibited higher basal cAMP production, but was activated even further by the ScFv. The inactivating mutant A593P is a completely inactive receptor associated with (associated with pseudo-hermaphroditism. It does not respond to the hormone at all. The ScFv JE10 binds to this receptor and stimulates cAMP production. This observation is rather striking, as it is possible to activate a completely inactive mutant that could not be stimulated by the hormone by a binder specific for the hinge region. It is not clear how the binder that interacts with the hinge region affects the function of the inactive TMD thus providing an interesting tool to investigate the interactions between the hinge region and TMD that are probably key to understand the activation of GpHR. which has been shown to be central to the GpHR activation mechanism, (Agrawal & Dighe, 2009; Majumdar et al., 2012b; Schaarschmidt, Huth, Meier, Paschke, & Jaeschke, 2014). As per the recently suggested model by Deupi et. al., that each mutation and agonist can take a different pathway during activation (Kobilka & Deupi, 2007). The activated state induced by JE10 in D578Y and A593P seems to be different from the wild type LHR, with each activated receptor state having different capacity to bind to the G protein. The difference in G protein capacity in itself reflects the different receptor turnover or different Gs uncouplings or different Gs binding affinities, which needs to be further investigated, opening up another avenue for exploration. There is a lacuna in understanding the signal relay from the hinge to TMD. However, JE10 seems to be activating the wild type LHR and the mutants directly or indirectly by modulating the 6th helix of the TMD, known to be important for hormone independent activation of LHR (Fanelli, 2000; Latronico & Segaloff, 2007; Majumdar et al., 2012b). As evident from the absence of any hinge mediated constrain on LHR TMD and absence of uncharged residues present in LHR LRRD-TMD interface (LHR ECD Model 1), LHR hinge does not seem to be maintaining significant interactions with the TMD in absence of a ligand or in its basal state. Hormone/ agonist binding or activating mutations act as a positive regulator (inducing conformation change in hinge), required to bridge the interactions between LHR hinge and the TMD, which is supported by various studies in the past (Karges et al., 2005; Majumdar et al., 2012b; Nishi, Nakabayashi, Kobilka, & Hsueh, 2002; Osuga et al., 1997; Ryu, Gilchrist, Tung, Ji, & Ji, 1998; Zeng, Phang, Song, Ji, & Ji, 2001). This interaction bridged by the conformational change in the hinge region, seems to isomerize the closed state of LHR into an activated state. The present study supports the conformational induction model for receptor activation in which intramolecular interactions between the two domains (hinge-TMD) lead to the receptor activation. In conclusion, this study presents a possible mechanism of activation of LHR by a partial agonist ScFv, which induces the conformation change in the disordered loop region (a.a.313-349) of the hinge and stabilizes it into helical state. This conformation change is predicted to be important for relaying the activation signal to the TMD. The study also demonstrates the activation of a completely inactive mutant A593P by JE10, suggesting a distinct possibility of its use as a therapeutic tool in treating infertility caused by inactivating mutations in LHR. On a second note, the study extends the role of LRRs, apart from direct hormone binding, to an indirect allosteric role in hormone binding, LHR activation and functional stability. This functional stability does not seem to be restricted to a single LHR but also depends on its interaction with nearby protomers. Though there are evidences for and against each of the above discussed possibilities, as yet there is no accepted model that explains the precise steps of receptor activation, hence, the molecular details of these interactions needs to be investigated in future.

Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:27:18Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2009-08-10Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T19:35:12Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 cortejunior_ao_me_araca.pdf: 654847 bytes, checksum: bc307df312fdd42315035ada00da030f (MD5) / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) / Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) / Seis novilhas Nelore tiveram seus ciclos estrais acompanhados durante diferentes estações do ano (outono n=11; inverno n=8; primavera n=9; verão n=9) com exames ultrassonográficos diários para contar e mensurar folículos ≥3mm. Amostras de sangue foram colhidas a cada 12h para hormônio luteinizante (LH) e progesterona (P4), e a cada 3h do estro até a ovulação para caracterizar o pico de LH. Cinco novilhas ovariectomizadas receberam 17β-estradiol (2μg/kg/p.v.) em cada estação, e amostras de sangue foram colhidas depois disso a cada 3h para quantificação de LH. A diferença percentual mensal ( %) do peso não variou entre as estações. A concentração média de P4 no ciclo estral foi maior (p=0,001) e o número de folículos menor (p=0,001) durante o outono (2,5±0,2ng/mL; 7,8±0,1) e verão (2,9±0,3ng/mL; 6,8±0,2) comparado com o inverno (1,4±0,2ng/mL; 9,6±0,3) e primavera (1,6±0,2ng/mL; 9,7±0,3). Durante o inverno houve mais ciclos estrais com três (5 de 8) e durante o verão somente ciclos com duas ondas foliculares (p=0,009). Como a secreção de LH não variou, apesar da variação sazonal na concentração de P4, e como houve correlação negativa entre os valores máximos de P4 e a variação percentual do fotoperíodo (p=0,0056; r = -0,4465), uma variação sazonal na sensibilidade das células luteínicas ao LH precisa ser avaliada. Nas novilhas ovariectomizadas, a concentração circanual de LH sem o estímulo de estradiol foi significante (p=0,0214). A resposta de LH ao tratamento de estradiol foi menor no verão (0,8±0,2ng/mL vs 1,3±0,5ng/mL). Nós supomos que existe variação sazonal na sensibilidade hipotalâmica ao estradiol. / Six Nelore heifers had their estrous cycle followed during different seasons of the year (autumn n=11; winter n=8; spring n=9 and summer n=9) with daily ultrasonographic exams to count and measure follicles ≥3mm. Blood was collected every 12h for luteinizing hormone (LH) and progesterone (P4), and every 3h from estrus until ovulation to characterize the LH peak. Five ovariectomized heifers were injected with 17β-estradiol (2μg/kg/LW) every season and blood samples were collected thereafter at 3h intervals for LH quantification. The monthly body weight percentile difference ( %) did not vary between seasons. Average P4 concentration for the cycle was higher (p=0.001) and follicle number lower during autumn (2.5±.2ng/ml; 7.8±.1) and summer (2.9±.3ng/ml; 6.8±.2) (p=0.001) compared to winter (1.4±.2ng/ml; 9.6±.3) and spring (1.6±.2ng/ml; 9.7±.3). During winter there were more estrous cycles with three follicle waves (5 out of 8) and during summer only cycles with two follicular waves (p=0.009). As LH secretion did not vary despite seasonal variation in P4 concentration and as there was a negative correlation between higher P4 values and daily percentile variation of photoperiod ( %, p=0.0056; r= -0.4465), a seasonal variation in luteal cell sensitivity to LH needs to be evaluated. In the ovariectomized Nelore heifers, the LH circanual concentration without estradiol stimulus was significant (p=0.0214). The LH response to estradiol treatment was lower in summer (0.8±.2ng/ml vs 1.3±.5ng/ml). We hypothesize there exists seasonal variation in hypothalamic sensitivity to estradiol.

Submitted by Cláudia Bueno (claudiamoura18@gmail.com) on 2016-04-01T20:41:57Z No. of bitstreams: 2 Tese - Mônica Canêdo Silva Maia - 2015.pdf: 2190840 bytes, checksum: b52ab9d3f319bc193309f78f9ef2e243 (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Luciana Ferreira (lucgeral@gmail.com) on 2016-04-04T11:56:43Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 Tese - Mônica Canêdo Silva Maia - 2015.pdf: 2190840 bytes, checksum: b52ab9d3f319bc193309f78f9ef2e243 (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-04T11:56:43Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 Tese - Mônica Canêdo Silva Maia - 2015.pdf: 2190840 bytes, checksum: b52ab9d3f319bc193309f78f9ef2e243 (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-12-03 / Controlled ovarian stimulation has become an integral part of infertility treatment. Treatment options with recombinant gonadotrophins add more to knowledge on folliculogenesis and ovarian steroidogenesis. The role of recombinant luteinizing hormone is controversial undergoing ovarian stimulation and has been widely debated. Objective: To compare the effects of supplementation with recombinant luteinizing hormone (rLH) for controlled ovarian stimulation with recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) in a protocol with GnRH-antagonist in cycles of IVF/ICSI. Methods: Case-control study with 113 patients attended at a university center in the city of Goiania, aged between 34-42 years, who were divided into two groups according to an ovarian stimulation scheme: Group I (n= 60): rFSH (control group) and Group II (n= 53): rFSH + rLH (treated group). These groups were comparable for age, BMI, duration of infertility, serum FSH, LH and estradiol. Numbers of oocytes collected and in metaphase II, fertilization rate, embryos rate and rates of chemical and clinical pregnancy were analyzed. Data analysis was conducted using the statistical software BioStat ® 5.3. Differences in proportions were assessed by chi-square test and means by Wilcoxon Mann- Whitney test. P < 0,05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean age of patients in Group I was 37.3±2.1 years and Group II 37.9±2.4 years (P > 0.05). The comparability of the other main characteristics (duration of infertility, BMI, FSH, LH and basal estradiol) were also observed between Groups I and II (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding: number of oocytes retrieved (Group I= 4.9 ± 2.1, Group II= 5.7 ± 2.6, P= 0.061), number of oocytes in metaphase II (Group I= 3.4 ± 1.6, Group II= 4.0 ± 1.9, P= 0.060), fertilization rate (Group I= 65.3%, Group II= 69.4 %, OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.85-1.70, P= 0.282), embryos rate (Group I= 85.4%, Group II= 88.5%, OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.73-2.36, P= 0.355), rate of chemical pregnancy (Group I= 20.0%, Group II= 24.5%; OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.53-3.16, P= 0.562) and clinical pregnancy rate (Group I= 20.0%, Group II= 22.6%, OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.47-2.89, P= 0.731). Conclusion: In this study it was concluded that supplementation with r-LH showed no benefit with respect to variables during controlled ovarian stimulation with GnRH antagonists. / A estimulação ovariana controlada tornou-se parte integrante no tratamento da infertilidade. As opções de tratamento com gonadotrofinas recombinantes adicionaram mais conhecimento da foliculogênese e esteroidogênese ovariana. O uso do hormônio luteinizante recombinante é controverso em pacientes que passam por estimulação ovariana e tem sido amplamente debatido. Objetivo: Comparar os efeitos da suplementação de LHr para a estimulação ovariana controlada com FSHr em um protocolo com antagonista de GnRH em ciclos de FIV/ICSI. Métodos: Estudo caso-controle com 113 pacientes atendidas em um centro universitário na cidade de Goiânia, idade entre 34 a 42 anos, as quais foram divididas em dois grupos de acordo com a estimulação ovariana: Grupo I (n= 60): FSHr (grupo controle) e Grupo II (n= 53): FSHr + LHr (grupo tratado). Estes grupos foram comparáveis para idade, IMC, duração da infertilidade, níveis séricos de FSH, LH e estradiol. Foram analisados número de ovócitos coletados e em metáfase II, taxa de fertilização, taxa de clivagem embrionária, taxas de gravidez química e clínica. A análise de dados foi realizada pelo programa estatístico Bioestat 5.3®. As diferenças de proporções foram avaliadas por teste de Qui-quadrado e as médias pelo teste Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney. p < 0,05 foi considerado estatisticamente significante. Resultados: A média de idade das pacientes do Grupo I foi 37,3 ± 2,1 anos e do Grupo II de 37,9 ± 2,4 anos (p > 0,05). A comparabilidade das outras principais características (duração da infertilidade, índice de massa corporal, FSH, LH e estradiol basal) foram também observadas entre os Grupos I e II (p > 0,05). Não houve diferença significativa entre os dois grupos em relação ao: número de ovócitos captados (Grupo I= 4,9 ± 2,1; Grupo II= 5,7 ± 2,6; p= 0,061), número de ovócitos em metáfase II (Grupo I= 3,4 ± 1,6; Grupo II= 4,0 ± 1,9; p= 0,060), taxa de fertilização (Grupo I= 65,3%; Grupo II= 69,4%; OR 1,20; IC 95% 0,85-1,70; p= 0,282), taxa de clivagem embrionária (Grupo I= 85,4%; Grupo II= 88,5%; OR 1,31; IC 95% 0,73-2,36; p= 0,355), taxa de gravidez química (Grupo I= 20,0%; Grupo II= 24,5%; OR 1,30; IC 95% 0,53-3,16; p= 0,562) e taxa de gravidez clínica (Grupo I= 20,0%; Grupo II= 22,6%, OR 1,17; IC 95% 0,47-2,89; p= 0,731). Conclusão: Neste estudo concluiu-se que a suplementação com LHr não demonstrou benefício em relação às variáveis analisadas durante a estimulação ovariana controlada com antagonistas de GnRH.

Corpus luteum (CL), a transient endocrine structure formed from the ruptured ovarian follicle after ovulation, secretes progesterone (P4) that is essential for establishment and maintenance of pregnancy in mammals. The biosynthesis and secretion of P4 from CL depends, in general, on trophic hormones of the anterior pituitary gland and on hormones or factors originating from ovary, uterus, embryo and placenta. The structure and function of CL tissue is regulated by intricate interplay between two types of factors, namely, the luteotrophic factors, which stimulate CL growth and function, i.e., P4 secretion, and the luteolytic factors, which inhibit CL function and lead to luteal regression. In monoovulatory species such as higher primates and bovines, a striking diversity in the regulation of CL function exists not only between species, but also within the species during different stages of the luteal phase. In higher primates, unlike other species, one of the important characteristics of CL regulation is that, during non-fertile cycle, circulating LH appears to be the sole trophic factor responsible for maintenance of its function, and during fertile cycle, chorionic gonadotropin (CG), an LH analogue, originating from placenta maintains CL function. In higher primates, the role/involvement of luteolytic factors during luteolysis remains elusive. On the other hand, in the bovine species, the role/involvement of luteolytic factor, prostaglandin (PG) F2α during luteolysis is well established. It should be pointed out that in both the species, the mechanism of luteolysis is still poorly understood and the work presented in this thesis attempts to address these lacunae. Further, in bovines, studies have been carried out to examine potential trophic factor(s) responsible for the maintenance of CL function. Chapter I provides an extensive review of literature on CL structure and function with emphasis on factors that influence its growth, development, function and demise in primates and bovines. In Chapter II, employing bonnet monkey (Macaca radiata) as the representative animal model for higher primates, various studies have been conducted to examine the role of molecular modulators involved in regulation of CL function, particularly during spontaneous luteolysis. Although, it is well established that LH is essential for the maintenance of CL function in higher primates, the mechanism(s) responsible for the decline in serum P4 levels at the end of non-fertile cycles, without a concomitant change in circulating LH milieu, remains to be addressed. Several experiments have been conducted to examine the component(s) of luteotrophic (LH/CG) signaling that is/are modulated during luteolysis in the bonnet monkey CL. To understand the relative lack of responsiveness of CL to the circulating LH during the late luteal phase, LH/CG receptor (R) dynamics (expression of LH/CGR and its various transcript variants) was examined throughout the luteal phase and during different functional states of the monkey CL. The results indicated presence of LH/CGR mRNA, its transcript variants and functional LH/CGR protein in the monkey CL on day 1 of menses. Moreover, the functionality of receptors was tested by confirming the biological response of the CL to bolus administration of exogenous LH preparations, which eventually suggested factor(s) downstream of LH/CGR activation to account for the decline in CL function observed during non-fertile cycle. Studies have been conducted to identify molecular modulators that would selectively exploit intraluteal processes to regulate trophic signaling pathways that are critical to the control of luteal function. Immunoblot and qPCR analyses were carried out to examine presence and activation of Src family of kinases (SFKs) and cAMP-phosphodiesterases (PDEs) during various functional states of CL. The results revealed an increased activation of Src (phosphorylated at Tyr 416) during spontaneous and PGF2α/CET-induced luteolysis that may participate in the regulation of cAMP levels in part by increasing the cAMP-PDE activity observed during spontaneous luteolysis. This observation raised the question on the possible mechanism by which CG, an analog of pituitary LH, rescues CL function during early pregnancy. Thus, subsequent experiments involving LH/hCG administration in CET-treated animals as well as simulated early pregnancy animal model were conducted and the results revealed that, a bolus of LH/hCG decreased Src activation and cAMP-PDE activity accompanying a momentous increase in cAMP levels in both these models that further led to a concomitant increase in P4 secretion. Although the mechanisms of action of LH/CG involve modulation of a number of signaling pathways in the CL, by far, the results from various experiments suggested that it leads to activation of Src kinase and cAMP-PDE, thus causing inhibition of various elements of the primary signaling cascade- AC/cAMP/PKA/CREB during spontaneous luteolysis. One of the consequences of activation of Src kinase and cAMP-PDE was the regulation of expression of genes associated with steroidogenesis and it was observed that expression of SR-B1, a membrane receptor associated with trafficking of HDL-CE into the luteal cells, was lower in the regressed CL. The results taken together suggest that the decrease in responsiveness of CL to LH milieu during non-fertile cycles is not associated with changes in LH/CGR dynamics, but, is instead coupled to the activation of Src kinase and cAMP-PDE, inhibition of molecules downstream of LH signaling, and a decrease in the SR-B1 expression that regulates cholesterol economy of the luteal cell, and in turn, P4 secretion. The control of primate CL function appears to be dominated by the luteotrophic factors (LH/CG) over the luteolytic factors, since the process of luteal regression was overcome by administration of LH/CG. Further, in the primate CL, the molecular modulators of LH/CG signaling (Src kinase and PDE) are maintained in the repressed state by the luteotrophic factor LH/CG for maximum steroidogenic function. In contrast, in non-primate species, without invoking a role for the luteotrophic factor, essentially the synthesis and secretion of luteolytic factor, PGF2α, from the uterus is kept in check during pregnancy by the trophoblast derived IFN- and thus allowing CL to continue to function that is essential for maintenance of pregnancy. In the bovine species, the mechanism of PGF2α-induced luteolysis that involves a change in expression of genes associated with various processes of cellular function is poorly understood. Experiments were conducted utilizing buffalo cows (Bubalus bubalis) as a model system, to determine temporal changes in the global gene expression profile of the CL in response to PGF2α treatment. For this purpose, CL tissues were collected on day 11 of estrous cycle without treatment (designated as 0 h) and at 3, 6 and 18 h post PGF2α treatment for various analyses. Global changes in gene expression pattern in the CL were investigated employing Affymetrix GeneChip bovine genome array and the results are presented in Chapter III. The hybridization intensity values obtained by microarray analysis were subjected to R/Bioconductor tool. Following the application of highly stringent statistical filters to eliminate false positives, a set of differentially expressed genes were identified. The differentially expressed genes were further classified based on a fold change cut-off filter of ≥2, and the analysis revealed 127 genes to be differentially expressed within 3 h of PGF2α administration, of these 64 and 63 genes were up-regulated and down-regulated, respectively. Analysis of microarray data at 6 h post PGF2α administration revealed 774 genes to be differentially expressed, of which 544 genes were up-regulated, while 230 genes were down-regulated. The microarray analysis performed on CL tissues collected at 18 h post PGF2α administration showed that out of the total 939 differentially expressed genes, 571 genes were up-regulated, while 368 genes were down-regulated. Analysis of the ontology report for the biological processes category showed that initially in response to PGF2α administration, genes regulating steroidogenesis, cell survival and transcription were differentially regulated in the CL, but at later time points, differential expression of genes involved in apoptosis, PGF2α metabolism, tissue remodeling and angiogenesis was observed. Further, involvement of molecules downstream of LH/IGF-1 activation was investigated and the results obtained indicated that PGF2α interfered with the LH/IGF-1 signaling since the expression of LH/CGR, GHR and pAkt were down-regulated following PGF2αadministration. Furthermore, the functional luteolysis observed post PGF2αadministration appeared to be due to an interruption in cholesterol trafficking to inner mitochondrial membrane, since StAR expression was inhibited. The results obtained also demonstrated that the expression of AGTR1, VEGFR2 and R3 were down-regulated following PGF 2α administration. Further, the data obtained also suggested modulation of expression of pro- and anti-angiogenic factors upon PGF2α-treatment indicative of an involvement of other autocrine or paracrine factor(s) in the regression of bovine CL. This was an interesting finding as it suggests a novel and potential functional relationship between angiogenesis and the luteolytic response of CL to PGF2α administration. In bovines, despite extensive research being carried out to examine factors involved in the regulation of development and function of the CL, the trophic factor(s) required for maintenance of CL function, especially, P4 biosynthesis and secretion are not well characterized. It was hypothesized that the function of the CL during its finite lifespan must be responsive to LH as well as to various growth factors. Thus, experiments were conducted to examine the effects of increased LH and GH/IGF-I on the maintenance of CL function during mid luteal phase and post PGF2α administration and the results of these studies are presented in Chapter IV. To elucidate the role of LH as a trophic factor in the regulation of CL function, effects of increased endogenous LH through GnRH administration and exogenous hCG injections were examined. The results indicated an absence of noticeable effect of various hCG/GnRH treatments on circulating P4 levels. On the other hand, administration of GH resulted in increased serum IGF-1 and P4 levels. It was further observed that the administration of a combination of hCG and GH increased serum P4 levels better than treatment with GH alone. Further experiments were carried out to examine the complex reciprocal relationship between LH/GH and PGF2α on expression of genes involved in the regulation of luteal structure and function. In buffalo cows, administration of exogenous hCG and/or GH following inhibition of CL function by PGF2α administration did not prevent the PGF2α-induced decline in serum P4 levels, but PGF2-mediated decrease in expression of LH/CGR and GHR genes was prevented upon GH administration. However, the decrease in StAR expression was not restored by hCG and GH treatments, thereby indicating that PGF2 action was not prevented by hCG and/or GH treatments. Taken together, the results of studies carried out in buffalo cows employing various experimental model systems suggest essential role for LH and GH/IGF-1, however, these factors were unable to reverse PGF2α-induced luteolysis. Further, our crucial findings of the effects of increased endogenous LH and IGF-1, in addition to their relationship with luteolytic agents such as PGF2α will open new avenues for studying the mechanisms involved in the regulation of structural and functional properties of the buffalo CL. It is well known that a large number of buffalo cows experience loss of pregnancy and infertility due to inadequate luteal function and/or failure of timely insemination. Results from our studies suggest that the incorporation of PGF2α and hCG or GH/IGF-1 protocols in buffalo cows to be beneficial for improving their breeding efficiency as these protocols are likely to increase luteal function with defined luteolysis. To summarize, the results of studies described in the present thesis provide new insights into the physiological and molecular mechanisms involved in the regulation of CL function during luteolysis in the monoovulatory species. The results suggest that the maintenance of CL function appears to be dependent on both luteotrophic and luteolytic factors, but with a varied degree of dominance between the two species examined. Further, the results indicate that while the luteotrophic factors (LH/CG) dominate the CL regulation in primates, the regulation of CL function in bovines is dominated by the actions of luteolytic factor (PGF2α). In monoovulatory species, the luteotrophic and luteolytic factors following binding to their specific plasma membrane receptors on the luteal cells, would counteract each other and modulate activation of various downstream signaling molecules subsequently leading to regulation of gene expression and P4 secretion (Fig.5.1). LH: luteinizing hormone; CG: chorionic gonadotropin; LH/CGR: LH/CG receptor; Gαs: stimulatory α-subunit of trimeric G-protein; AC: adenylate cyclase; cAMP: cyclic adenosine monophosphate; PKA: protein kinase A; p: phosphorylation: CREB: cAMP response element binding protein; SR-B1: scavenger receptor class B, type I; SF-1: steroidogenic factor 1; LRH-1: liver receptor homologue 1; P4; progesterone; Src; sarcoma; PDE4D: cAMP phosphodiesterase 4D; StAR, steroidogenic acute regulatory protein; PGF2α: prostaglandin F2α; PTGFR: PGF2α receptor; PLC: phospholipase C; CYP19A1: cytochrome P450 aromatase; PTGR1: Prostaglandin reductase 1; AREG: Amphiregulin; RTK: receptor tyrosine kinase; Akt: protein kinase B; FKHR: forkhead transcription factor; DAPL1: death associated protein like 1; ARG2: Arginase, type II Growth factor LH/CGR RR AC Gαs ? Gα TT P? Gα K PKP src cAMP ? P Akt PDE4D P PFKHR FKHR CREB P LRH-1CREB P SF-1 Genes associated with Genes associated with apoptosis ? CYP19A1, apoptosis SR-B1 PTGR1 DAPL1 SF-1, LRH-1 AREG ARG 2 P4 biosynthesis Apoptosis? P4 biosynthesis Apoptosis MONKEY BUFFALO COW Shown here is the diagram depicting intracellular signaling pathways regulated by luteotrophic factor (LH) and luteolytic factor (PGF2α) and their cross talk to counteract changes in the expressions of genes associated with the biosynthesis and secretion of P4 and apoptosis in the CL. In primates, LH/CG activates a multitude of intracellular signaling cascades, primarily Gαs/AC/cAMP/PKA/CREB leading to changes in gene expression. LH during early and mid luteal phase and CG during pregnancy maintain the activation of Src and PDE in an inhibitory state. However, during the late luteal phase of non-fertile cycle, results in present study suggests that activated Src levels and PDE activity increase, with accompanying decrease in cAMP and pCREB levels leading to concomitant decrease in SR-B1 expression, and in turn, P4 secretion. Surprisingly, regulation of apoptotic gene expression and CL regression are still unclear. In bovines, PGF2α of uterine origin mediates changes in luteal gene expression and results in decreased P4 secretion, principally by reduction in StAR level. The present study suggests that during luteolysis PGF2α affects the genes regulated by LH, by interfering with LH (and perhaps IGF-1) signaling leading to alteration in the expression of genes crucial for CL structure and function. (Pl refer the abstract file for figures)