Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T18:39:57.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Sertoli Cell Adhesion Molecules: Comparative Expression of Lselectin and Other Cams in Primary Cells And Immortalized Sertoli Cell Lines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

Ann-Marie Broome
Affiliation:
Department of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, SC29208
Clarke F. Millette
Affiliation:
Department of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, SC29208
Get access

Extract

Cell adhesion and cell adhesion molecules (CAMs) play a crucial role in testicular development and function. The seminiferous epithelium, the functional unit of the testis, represents a three dimensional architecture of supporting Sertoli cells (SC), and developing germ cells (GC). The seminiferous epithelium, therefore, must be receptive not only to individual cell growth and differentiation, but also to cell-cell interactions. Morphologically distinct cell-cell interactions occur between SC and GC and also between SC.[1] In general, these junctions can be categorized into three types: adhesive, occluding, and gap junctions. The orientation and function of these junctions are interaction dependent. For example, desmosome-like junctions (spot desmosomes) are found between SC and GC. These junctions are present in the basal and intermediate compartments of the testis and serve to translocate developing GC. SC-SC interactions, like the zonula occludens (tight junction), function as vectorial mediators, maintaining the blood-testis barrier and SC polarity.

Type
Pathology
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Russell, L.D. and Peterson, R.N.. Int. Rev. Cytol. 94(1985)177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Roberts, K.P. et al. Biol. Reprod. 53(1995)1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. This research was supported by NTH grant HD-15269- CFM. The technical assistance of Dr. Robert Price, Purnima Jani, and Dennis Desimone is gratefully acknowledged.Google Scholar