Study shows melatonin positively affects hormonal balance in testicular toxicity models, suggesting potential therapeutic uses.
Acrylamide (ACR) is a toxic compound formed during high-temperature food processing that is known to induce oxidative stress and reproductive toxicity. This study investigated the protective effects of melatonin (MEL) on ACR-induced testicular toxicity, with a focus on hormonal regulation and steroidogenic pathways. Forty adults male Wistar rats were divided into five groups: control, ACR (50 mg/kg), ACR+MEL10 (ACR + 10 mg/kg MEL), ACR+MEL20 (ACR + 20 mg/kg MEL), and MEL20 (20 mg/kg MEL alone). Treatments were administered via intragastric gavage for 14 days. Serum follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), and testosterone levels were measured via ELISA, alongside testicular steroidogenic enzyme levels (StAR, P450scc, 17β-HSD3). Histopathological analysis was used to assess spermatogenic integrity via Johnsen scoring. ACR exposure significantly reduced the serum FSH, LH, and testosterone levels (p< .001), with a concurrent decrease in StAR, P450scc, and 17β-HSD3 expression. Histological evaluation revealed severe spermatocyte degeneration, necrosis, and disrupted spermatogenesis. MEL administration ameliorated these effects in a dose-dependent manner. ACR+MEL10 resulted in partial restoration of hormonal and enzymatic levels (p< .05), whereas ACR+MEL20 restored these parameters to near-control levels (p> .05). MEL also mitigated histopathological damage, preserving seminiferous tubule integrity and spermatogenic function. These findings suggest that MEL exerts protective effects against ACR-induced testicular toxicity through its antioxidant and antiapoptotic effects, restoring steroidogenic enzyme activity and the hormonal balance. MEL supplementation may be a potential therapeutic strategy against environmental toxicants affecting male reproductive health. Further mechanistic studies are warranted to elucidate its full protective scope.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tekin et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: