Search

Estrogen sulfotransferase (SULT1E1) inactivates estrogen and regulates its metabolic homeostats. Whereas SULT1E1 is expressed low in the liver of adult mice, it is induced by phenobarbital (PB) treatment or spontaneously in diabetic livers via nuclear receptors. Utilizing constitutive active/androstane receptor (CAR) KO, estrogen receptor α (ERα KO, phosphorylation-blocked ERα S216A KI mice, it is now demonstrated that, after being activated by PB, CAR binds and recruits ERα onto the Sulte1 promoter for subsequent phosphorylation at Ser216. This phosphorylation tightens CAR interacting with ERα and to activates the promoter. Hepatic SULT1E1 mRNA levels are constitutively up-regulated in type 1 diabetic Akita mice; CAR spontaneously accumulates in the nucleus and activates the Sult1e1 promoter by recruiting phosphorylated ERα in the liver as observed with PB-induced livers. Thus, this CAR-phosphorylated ERα signaling enables these two nuclear receptors to communicate, activating the Sult1e1 gene in response to either PB or diabetes in mice. ERα phosphorylation may integrate CAR into estrogen actions, providing insights into understanding drug-hormone interactions in clinical therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Humor is widely used as a means of supporting group solidarity, but what determines the direction that this humor takes (i.e. its quality and targets)? I suggest that the answer lies in an interaction between self-concept, perceptions of outgroups and micro group culture. Aspects of self-concept that are central for a group's identity work, especially how the group imagines outsiders, open possibilities for certain types of humor while closing off others. Then micro-cultural processes, heavily dependent on the exact persons present in a given interaction, influence the humorous forms used. This process explains why groups in roughly similar structural positions often make use of humor to generate solidarity in strikingly different ways, as well as why styles of humor vary, within limits, within groups. I provide illustrations of this process in two religious minority groups with very different humorous styles: atheists in the Bible Belt and evangelical Christians in Chicago. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]