Limits...
Leptin in the canine uterus and placenta: possible implications in pregnancy.

Balogh O, Staub LP, Gram A, Boos A, Kowalewski MP, Reichler IM - Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. (2015)

Bottom Line: In the Ut/Pl, Lep expression was higher at post-implantation and prepartum luteolysis than at mid-gestation, while in the Ut, Lep mRNA levels did not change during pregnancy.In the Ut, highest LepR mRNA was found at pre- and post-implantation.Aglepristone treatment resulted in a decrease of Lep mRNA levels from 24 to 72 h in the Ut without concomitant changes in the Ut/Pl or in LepR levels.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: Leptin (Lep) is known for its involvement in the regulation of reproductive functions. It is important for uterine receptivity, implantation, placental growth and maternal energy homeostasis in several species, but Lep's function in the pregnant dog has not been investigated.

Methods: Pregnant bitches were ovariohysterectomized at pre-implantation, post-implantation, mid-gestation and prepartum luteolysis. Two additional groups were treated with aglepristone in mid-gestation, and ovariohysterectomized 24 or 72 h later. Lep and leptin receptor (LepR) gene expression was detected by semi-quantitative real-time PCR in pre-implantation and inter-placental uterine sections (Ut) and in utero-placental compartments (Ut/Pl). Immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization (ISH) were performed for Lep and LepR protein and mRNA localization. Parametric one-way ANOVA, paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used for statistical analysis.

Results: In the Ut/Pl, Lep expression was higher at post-implantation and prepartum luteolysis than at mid-gestation, while in the Ut, Lep mRNA levels did not change during pregnancy. LepR expression in the Ut/Pl was up-regulated at prepartum luteolysis compared to the earlier stages. In the Ut, highest LepR mRNA was found at pre- and post-implantation. LepR expression was down-regulated in the Ut/Pl compared to the Ut at post-implantation and at mid-gestation. Aglepristone treatment resulted in a decrease of Lep mRNA levels from 24 to 72 h in the Ut without concomitant changes in the Ut/Pl or in LepR levels. Lep and LepR immunoreactivities were strong in the luminal and glandular epithelium in the Ut with abundant LepR signals in the subepithelial stroma. In the Ut/Pl, fetal trophoblasts stained stronger for Lep and LepR than decidual cells, and signals for both proteins were also detected in the glandular chambers. The myometrium, blood vessel media, and sporadically also the endothelium stained for Lep and LepR. ISH showed similar signal distribution in the Ut and Ut/Pl.

Conclusions: Lep and LepR are differentially expressed in the canine uterus and placenta during pregnancy, and their presence in various cell types indicates paracrine/autocrine roles. The Lep signaling system may be one of the pathways involved in feto-maternal cross-talk, implantation and maintenance of pregnancy, and may have a regulatory role around parturition.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Immunohistochemical detection of leptin and leptin receptor in the pre-implantation uterus and inter-placental sections during pregnancy. Immunohistochemical localization of leptin (Lep; A, C) and leptin receptor (LepR; B, D) in pre-implantation and inter-placental uterine sections (Ut) during pregnancy. (A) Lep immunostaining at pre-implantation is present in the luminal epithelium (solid arrows) and in the superficial glands (open arrows); endothelial cells stain occasionally (thin arrow). The myometrium and deep uterine glands also show positive reaction for Lep (inset upper right); inset (lower left) indicates the isotype control for Lep. (B) LepR immunoreactivity in the Ut at pre-implantation is noted in the surface epithelium (solid arrows), and in the endometrial stroma close to the lumen (solid arrowheads). Superficial glands (open arrows) stain weakly, and the myometrium and deep uterine glands also show positive signals (inset upper right); inset (lower left) shows the isotype control for LepR. (C) Strong Lep staining is visible in the deep uterine glands at mid-gestation; stromal signals are also evident (solid arrowheads), while endothelial cells show sporadic, weak signals (thin arrows). (D) At mid-gestation, the epithelium of deep uterine glands has stronger LepR immunoreactivity than at pre-implantation. Stromal signals are still present (solid arrowheads), and signals are also found occasionally in the endothelium (thin arrows). DG: deep uterine glands, MY: myometrium.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4358730&req=5

Fig4: Immunohistochemical detection of leptin and leptin receptor in the pre-implantation uterus and inter-placental sections during pregnancy. Immunohistochemical localization of leptin (Lep; A, C) and leptin receptor (LepR; B, D) in pre-implantation and inter-placental uterine sections (Ut) during pregnancy. (A) Lep immunostaining at pre-implantation is present in the luminal epithelium (solid arrows) and in the superficial glands (open arrows); endothelial cells stain occasionally (thin arrow). The myometrium and deep uterine glands also show positive reaction for Lep (inset upper right); inset (lower left) indicates the isotype control for Lep. (B) LepR immunoreactivity in the Ut at pre-implantation is noted in the surface epithelium (solid arrows), and in the endometrial stroma close to the lumen (solid arrowheads). Superficial glands (open arrows) stain weakly, and the myometrium and deep uterine glands also show positive signals (inset upper right); inset (lower left) shows the isotype control for LepR. (C) Strong Lep staining is visible in the deep uterine glands at mid-gestation; stromal signals are also evident (solid arrowheads), while endothelial cells show sporadic, weak signals (thin arrows). (D) At mid-gestation, the epithelium of deep uterine glands has stronger LepR immunoreactivity than at pre-implantation. Stromal signals are still present (solid arrowheads), and signals are also found occasionally in the endothelium (thin arrows). DG: deep uterine glands, MY: myometrium.

Mentions: In the Ut, Lep immunoreactivity was detected in the surface epithelium and superficial endometrial glands (Figure 4A). Weaker positive signals were present in the epithelium of deep uterine glands at pre- and post-implantation, but at mid-gestation, they became stronger in the deep glands but were variably present in the endometrial stroma (Figure 4C).Figure 4


Leptin in the canine uterus and placenta: possible implications in pregnancy.

Balogh O, Staub LP, Gram A, Boos A, Kowalewski MP, Reichler IM - Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. (2015)

Immunohistochemical detection of leptin and leptin receptor in the pre-implantation uterus and inter-placental sections during pregnancy. Immunohistochemical localization of leptin (Lep; A, C) and leptin receptor (LepR; B, D) in pre-implantation and inter-placental uterine sections (Ut) during pregnancy. (A) Lep immunostaining at pre-implantation is present in the luminal epithelium (solid arrows) and in the superficial glands (open arrows); endothelial cells stain occasionally (thin arrow). The myometrium and deep uterine glands also show positive reaction for Lep (inset upper right); inset (lower left) indicates the isotype control for Lep. (B) LepR immunoreactivity in the Ut at pre-implantation is noted in the surface epithelium (solid arrows), and in the endometrial stroma close to the lumen (solid arrowheads). Superficial glands (open arrows) stain weakly, and the myometrium and deep uterine glands also show positive signals (inset upper right); inset (lower left) shows the isotype control for LepR. (C) Strong Lep staining is visible in the deep uterine glands at mid-gestation; stromal signals are also evident (solid arrowheads), while endothelial cells show sporadic, weak signals (thin arrows). (D) At mid-gestation, the epithelium of deep uterine glands has stronger LepR immunoreactivity than at pre-implantation. Stromal signals are still present (solid arrowheads), and signals are also found occasionally in the endothelium (thin arrows). DG: deep uterine glands, MY: myometrium.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4358730&req=5

Fig4: Immunohistochemical detection of leptin and leptin receptor in the pre-implantation uterus and inter-placental sections during pregnancy. Immunohistochemical localization of leptin (Lep; A, C) and leptin receptor (LepR; B, D) in pre-implantation and inter-placental uterine sections (Ut) during pregnancy. (A) Lep immunostaining at pre-implantation is present in the luminal epithelium (solid arrows) and in the superficial glands (open arrows); endothelial cells stain occasionally (thin arrow). The myometrium and deep uterine glands also show positive reaction for Lep (inset upper right); inset (lower left) indicates the isotype control for Lep. (B) LepR immunoreactivity in the Ut at pre-implantation is noted in the surface epithelium (solid arrows), and in the endometrial stroma close to the lumen (solid arrowheads). Superficial glands (open arrows) stain weakly, and the myometrium and deep uterine glands also show positive signals (inset upper right); inset (lower left) shows the isotype control for LepR. (C) Strong Lep staining is visible in the deep uterine glands at mid-gestation; stromal signals are also evident (solid arrowheads), while endothelial cells show sporadic, weak signals (thin arrows). (D) At mid-gestation, the epithelium of deep uterine glands has stronger LepR immunoreactivity than at pre-implantation. Stromal signals are still present (solid arrowheads), and signals are also found occasionally in the endothelium (thin arrows). DG: deep uterine glands, MY: myometrium.
Mentions: In the Ut, Lep immunoreactivity was detected in the surface epithelium and superficial endometrial glands (Figure 4A). Weaker positive signals were present in the epithelium of deep uterine glands at pre- and post-implantation, but at mid-gestation, they became stronger in the deep glands but were variably present in the endometrial stroma (Figure 4C).Figure 4

Bottom Line: In the Ut/Pl, Lep expression was higher at post-implantation and prepartum luteolysis than at mid-gestation, while in the Ut, Lep mRNA levels did not change during pregnancy.In the Ut, highest LepR mRNA was found at pre- and post-implantation.Aglepristone treatment resulted in a decrease of Lep mRNA levels from 24 to 72 h in the Ut without concomitant changes in the Ut/Pl or in LepR levels.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: Leptin (Lep) is known for its involvement in the regulation of reproductive functions. It is important for uterine receptivity, implantation, placental growth and maternal energy homeostasis in several species, but Lep's function in the pregnant dog has not been investigated.

Methods: Pregnant bitches were ovariohysterectomized at pre-implantation, post-implantation, mid-gestation and prepartum luteolysis. Two additional groups were treated with aglepristone in mid-gestation, and ovariohysterectomized 24 or 72 h later. Lep and leptin receptor (LepR) gene expression was detected by semi-quantitative real-time PCR in pre-implantation and inter-placental uterine sections (Ut) and in utero-placental compartments (Ut/Pl). Immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization (ISH) were performed for Lep and LepR protein and mRNA localization. Parametric one-way ANOVA, paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used for statistical analysis.

Results: In the Ut/Pl, Lep expression was higher at post-implantation and prepartum luteolysis than at mid-gestation, while in the Ut, Lep mRNA levels did not change during pregnancy. LepR expression in the Ut/Pl was up-regulated at prepartum luteolysis compared to the earlier stages. In the Ut, highest LepR mRNA was found at pre- and post-implantation. LepR expression was down-regulated in the Ut/Pl compared to the Ut at post-implantation and at mid-gestation. Aglepristone treatment resulted in a decrease of Lep mRNA levels from 24 to 72 h in the Ut without concomitant changes in the Ut/Pl or in LepR levels. Lep and LepR immunoreactivities were strong in the luminal and glandular epithelium in the Ut with abundant LepR signals in the subepithelial stroma. In the Ut/Pl, fetal trophoblasts stained stronger for Lep and LepR than decidual cells, and signals for both proteins were also detected in the glandular chambers. The myometrium, blood vessel media, and sporadically also the endothelium stained for Lep and LepR. ISH showed similar signal distribution in the Ut and Ut/Pl.

Conclusions: Lep and LepR are differentially expressed in the canine uterus and placenta during pregnancy, and their presence in various cell types indicates paracrine/autocrine roles. The Lep signaling system may be one of the pathways involved in feto-maternal cross-talk, implantation and maintenance of pregnancy, and may have a regulatory role around parturition.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus