1
|
Zhang S, Li Q, Mao W, Zhao J, Gong Z, Liu B, Cao J. Prostaglandin E receptor 2 mediates the inducible effects of prostaglandin E 2 on expression of growth factors and enzymes in cattle endometrial epithelial cells and explants. Anim Sci J 2022; 93:e13766. [PMID: 36131609 DOI: 10.1111/asj.13766] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2021] [Revised: 04/01/2022] [Accepted: 06/29/2022] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2 ) is able to induce the expression of several growth factors and enzymes in cattle endometria. However, the specific type of PGE2 receptors which mediates this effect is not fully clear. In this study, the role of prostaglandin E receptor 2 (PTGER2) in PGE2 -mediated induction of growth factors and enzymes expression in cattle endometrial explants and epithelial cells were investigated. PTGER2 was blocked by a PTGER2 antagonist, AH6809, before PGE2 treatment, then the mRNA and protein expression levels of several growth factors and enzymes were compared with that in PGE2 alone treatment group by real-time RT-PCR and Western blotting analysis in endometrial epithelial cells and explants. Results indicated that PGE2 significantly increased the mRNA and protein levels of these growth factors and enzymes, while the rates of increment in the expression of these growth factors and enzymes were inhibited by AH6809. In addition, a PTGER2 agonist, butaprost, significantly increased the expression levels of these growth factors and enzymes, and the effect could be blocked by AH6809. In conclusion, PTGER2 was found to be one dominant receptor mediating the inducible effects of PGE2 on the expression of these growth factors and enzymes in cattle endometrial explants and epithelial cells.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuangyi Zhang
- Laboratory of Veterinary Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China.,Key Laboratory of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment Techniques for Animal Disease, Ministry of Agriculture, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China
| | - Qianru Li
- Laboratory of Veterinary Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China.,Key Laboratory of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment Techniques for Animal Disease, Ministry of Agriculture, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China
| | - Wei Mao
- Laboratory of Veterinary Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China.,Key Laboratory of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment Techniques for Animal Disease, Ministry of Agriculture, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China
| | - Jiamin Zhao
- Laboratory of Veterinary Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China.,Key Laboratory of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment Techniques for Animal Disease, Ministry of Agriculture, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China
| | - Zhiguo Gong
- Laboratory of Veterinary Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China.,Key Laboratory of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment Techniques for Animal Disease, Ministry of Agriculture, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China
| | - Bo Liu
- Laboratory of Veterinary Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China.,Key Laboratory of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment Techniques for Animal Disease, Ministry of Agriculture, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China
| | - Jinshan Cao
- Laboratory of Veterinary Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China.,Key Laboratory of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment Techniques for Animal Disease, Ministry of Agriculture, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Srinivasalu N, Zhang S, Xu R, Reinach PS, Su Y, Zhu Y, Qu J, Zhou X. Crosstalk between EP2 and PPARα Modulates Hypoxic Signaling and Myopia Development in Guinea Pigs. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2021; 61:44. [PMID: 32725213 PMCID: PMC7425689 DOI: 10.1167/iovs.61.8.44] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARα) levels mediate extracellular matrix (ECM) changes by altering the levels of hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha (HIF-1α) in various tissues. We aimed to determine, in the sclera of guinea pigs, whether a prostanoid receptor (EP2)-linked cAMP modulation affects PPARα and HIF-1α signaling during myopia. Methods Three-week-old guinea pigs (n = 20 in each group), were monocularly injected with either an EP2 agonist (butaprost 1 µmol/L/10 µmol/L), an antagonist (AH6809 10 µmol/L/30 µmol/L) or a vehicle solution for two weeks during normal ocular growth. Separate sets of animals received these injections and underwent form deprivation (FD) simultaneously. Refraction and axial length (AL) were measured at two weeks, followed by scleral tissue isolation for quantitative PCR (qPCR) analysis (n = 10) and cAMP detection (n = 10) using a radioimmunoassay. Results Butaprost induced myopia development during normal ocular growth, with proportional increases in AL and cAMP levels. FD did not augment the magnitude of myopia or cAMP elevations in these agonist-injected eyes. AH6809 suppressed cAMP increases and myopia progression during FD, but had no effect in a normal visual environment. Of the diverse set of 27 genes related to cAMP, PPARα and HIF-1α signaling and ECM remodeling, butaprost differentially regulated 15 of them during myopia development. AH6809 injections during FD negated such differential gene expressions. Conclusion EP2 agonism increased cAMP and HIF-1α signaling subsequent to declines in PPARα and RXR mRNA levels, which in turn decreased scleral fibrosis and promoted myopia. EP2 antagonism instead inhibited each of these responses. Our data suggest that EP2 suppression may sustain scleral ECM structure and inhibit myopia development.
Collapse
|