ArticleThe Journal of physiology2002
New light shed on fluid formation in the seminiferous tubules of the rat.
Article in The Journal of physiology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- SOX17-positive rete testis epithelium is required for Sertoli valve formation and normal spermiogenesis in the male mouse.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Perfusion in Organ-on-Chip Models and Its Applicability to the Replication of Spermatogenesis In Vitro.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Germ cell-specific disruption of the Meig1 gene causes impaired spermiogenesis in mice.Andrology · 2013Article
- Tubular fluid secretion in the seminiferous epithelium: ion transporters and aquaporins in Sertoli cells.The Journal of membrane biology · 2010Review
- Do seminiferous tubules secrete a fluid rich in KHCO3?The Journal of physiology · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study the effects of perfusing isolated seminiferous tubules of the testes are reported for the first time. Initial perfusion studies (fast rate perfusion) resulted in gross morphological damage to the seminiferous tubules. The recorded transepithelial potential (V(t)) was close to 0 mV. Slow perfusion rates eliminated morphological damage to the perfused tubules. These tubules exhibited a V(t) of -5.4 +/- 1.8 mV which was significantly different (P < 0.0001) from tubules that were perfused at a fast rate. Additional non-perfusion electrophysiological experiments (oil-gap and agar probe techniques) provided the confirmation that tubules not morphologically compromised produced a higher V(t) which was not statistically different (P < 0.0001) from slowly perfused tubules. A revised hypothesis on fluid secretion is postulated. In brief, that the seminiferous tubule is solely responsible for the production of its luminal fluid. This hypothesis is contrary to the long standing 'Tuck' hypothesis which suggested that the source of luminal fluid in the seminiferous tubule originated from secretions of Sertoli cells as well as from distal testicular structures, e.g. the rete testis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.