Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
Non-Genomic Actions of Steroids in Ovine Endometrium
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Non-Genomic Actions of Steroids in Ovine Endometrium



  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. Kyle Ireton Dr. Fredrick Stormshak
  • 2. Relevance Biological Relevance  Steroids regulate reproductive organs/processes and pituitary gland Health Related Issues  Steroids regulate onset and development of breast and uterine cancer, and promote cardiovascular health content/uploads/2008/02/doctor-with-patient.jpg
  • 3. Two Regulatory Mechanisms of Steroids: Genomic (Slow) Vs. Non-Genomic (Fast)
  • 4. Genomic actions of steroids: “Slow”
  • 5. Non-genomic actions of steroids: “Fast”
  • 6. Possible Non-Genomic Actions of Estrogen Biological Basis for Investigation  Estradiol (E2) is essential for rapid development of the endometrial lining, for reception of a fertilized ovum (egg) In Vitro Basis for Investigation  Specific plasma membrane binding site for E2 in endometrium first observed by Pietras and Szego (1977)  Translocation of up to 3% nuclear estrogen receptor (nER) protein from nucleus to plasma membrane demonstrated by Razandi et al. (1999) in transfected CHO cells
  • 7. Research Focus  Does a quantifiable correlation exist between nER and the membrane binding protein for E2, in a live domestic animal model? er_horm_rec/dbd/er-ere-system-big.gif
  • 8. Working Hypothesis  A strong, quantifiable correlation exists between nER and the membrane binding protein for E2, in the ovine endometrium. ogyPages/M/MembraneProteins.gif
  • 9. Methods  Two groups ovariectomized ewes  E2 upregulates nER production  P4 suppresses nER production  Koligian and Stormshak (1977)
  • 10. Injection Schedule  Alternating injections simulate natural estrous cycle of ewes  Greater levels on nER predicted in Group 1  Hence, greater binding activity predicted for Group 1 ewes Day Group 1 Ewes Group 2 Ewes 1 Estradiol (E2) 25 μg E2 2 E2 E2 3 Progesterone (P4) 10 mg P4 4 P4 P4 5 P4 P4 6 P4 P4 7 P4 P4 8 E2 P4 9 E2 P4 10 (none) (none) 11 Recover Tissue Recover Tissue
  • 11. Methods  Inter-caruncular tissue of endometrium collected  Tissue processed and E2 nuclear and membrane binding activity counted P.L. Senger, Pathways to Pregnancy and Parturition, First Revised edition, 1999
  • 12. Tissue Sample Analysis Membrane Tissue Assays:  BCA protein assay quantifies membrane protein  Radioreceptor assay (utilizing [3H]- estradiol- 17β) quantifies specific binding activity of E2, per mg Protein Nuclear Tissue Assays:  DNA assay quantifies DNA in nucleus  Radioreceptor assay quantifies nuclear binding of E2, per femtomole DNA
  • 13. Results: Nuclear Binding Activity of E2 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 Group 1 (E2) 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 Group 2 (P4) In units of fmol E2 bound/μg DNA P-value <.07
  • 14. Results: Membrane Binding Activity of E2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Group 1 (E2) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Group 2 (P4) In units of fmol E2 bound/ mg membrane protein P-value <.05
  • 15. Conclusions and Future Investigations Conclusions:  Results support hypothesis that nER shares quantifiable correlation to E2 membrane binding protein, in live domestic animal models Future Investigations:  Investigate blocking action of P4 on E2 nuclear/membrane binding (this Fall)  Further elucidate intracellular mechanisms of non- genomic activity (ERK 1/2, PI3K, PIP2 pathways)
  • 16. Acknowledgments Dr. Stormshak, Professor Emeritus and HHMI Mentor Mary Meaker, Lab Technician Brian Kitamura, HHMI 2005 participant Kevin Ahern, HHMI program Coordinator HHMI and URISC programs