Action Kinetics of Inhibin in Superfused Pituitary Cells Depend on Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Treatment*

Abstract

We examined the effects of partly purified inhibin from porcine follicular fluid on FSH and LH release in superfused rat pituitary cell cultures exposed to different GnRH stimuli. Pituitary cells from immature male rats were cultured in chemically defined medium. After 4 days of static culture in the absence of inhibin preparation and GnRH, the cell monolayers were superfused for approximately 10 h at a constant speed (0.15 or 0.25 ml/min) with medium with or without inhibin preparation (1 micrograms/ml). During the superfusion, some cultures were stimulated with GnRH (10 nM) continuously or intermittently (1 min/0.5 h or 6 min/1 h). In the basal condition (no GnRH), inhibin suppressed FSH release after 5 h of exposure (P less than 0.01), whereas LH secretion was not affected. In cultures treated with GnRH pulses (of either frequency), the inhibitory effects on the GnRH-stimulated FSH and LH release were statistically significant (P less than 0.01) after 2 h of exposure, became more pronounced in the next several hours, then remained stable until the end of the experiment. In cultures exposed to GnRH continuously, the suppressing effects of inhibin preparation became significant (P less than 0.01) after 3 h of exposure and were maximal at 4 h (52% and 61% of control values for FSH and LH, respectively). Later, the suppressing effect became less pronounce due to the decreasing rate of gonadotropin secretion in control (no inhibin) cultures exposed continuously to GnRH. The magnitude of FSH and LH suppression after 9 h of exposure to the inhibin preparation was statistically different (P less than 0.05) for different GnRH treatments and was more pronounced with GnRH pulses (24-27% and 54-57% of control values for FSH and LH, respectively) than with cultures exposed to GnRH continuously (77% and 89% of control values for FSH and LH, respectively) or in the absence of GnRH (50% and 92% of control values for FSH and LH, respectively). We conclude that both the kinetics and magnitude of action of the inhibin preparation on FSH and LH release can differ significantly depending on the presence or absence of GnRH as well as on the mode of GnRH stimulation. Of particular importance is the observation that suppressive effects of inhibin preparation decline in cultures that have been desensitized to GnRH after prolonged continuous GnRH exposures. These differences stress the role of GnRH-inhibin interactions in the regulation of gonadotropin secretion and emphasize the importance of the mode of GnRH stimulation in studies concerning inhibin action on pituitary cells in vitro.