Aop: 18


Each AOP should be given a descriptive title that takes the form “MIE leading to AO”. For example, “Aromatase inhibition [MIE] leading to reproductive dysfunction [AO]” or “Thyroperoxidase inhibition [MIE] leading to decreased cognitive function [AO]”. In cases where the MIE is unknown or undefined, the earliest known KE in the chain (i.e., furthest upstream) should be used in lieu of the MIE and it should be made clear that the stated event is a KE and not the MIE. More help

PPARα activation in utero leading to impaired fertility in males

Short name
A short name should also be provided that succinctly summarises the information from the title. This name should not exceed 90 characters. More help
PPARα activation leading to impaired fertility

Graphical Representation

A graphical summary of the AOP listing all the KEs in sequence, including the MIE (if known) and AO, and the pair-wise relationships (links or KERs) between those KEs should be provided. This is easily achieved using the standard box and arrow AOP diagram (see this page for example). The graphical summary is prepared and uploaded by the user (templates are available) and is often included as part of the proposal when AOP development projects are submitted to the OECD AOP Development Workplan. The graphical representation or AOP diagram provides a useful and concise overview of the KEs that are included in the AOP, and the sequence in which they are linked together. This can aid both the process of development, as well as review and use of the AOP (for more information please see page 19 of the Users' Handbook).If you already have a graphical representation of your AOP in electronic format, simple save it in a standard image format (e.g. jpeg, png) then click ‘Choose File’ under the “Graphical Representation” heading, which is part of the Summary of the AOP section, to select the file that you have just edited. Files must be in jpeg, jpg, gif, png, or bmp format. Click ‘Upload’ to upload the file. You should see the AOP page with the image displayed under the “Graphical Representation” heading. To remove a graphical representation file, click 'Remove' and then click 'OK.'  Your graphic should no longer be displayed on the AOP page. If you do not have a graphical representation of your AOP in electronic format, a template is available to assist you.  Under “Summary of the AOP”, under the “Graphical Representation” heading click on the link “Click to download template for graphical representation.” A Powerpoint template file should download via the default download mechanism for your browser. Click to open this file; it contains a Powerpoint template for an AOP diagram and instructions for editing and saving the diagram. Be sure to save the diagram as jpeg, jpg, gif, png, or bmp format. Once the diagram is edited to its final state, upload the image file as described above. More help


List the name and affiliation information of the individual(s)/organisation(s) that created/developed the AOP. In the context of the OECD AOP Development Workplan, this would typically be the individuals and organisation that submitted an AOP development proposal to the EAGMST. Significant contributors to the AOP should also be listed. A corresponding author with contact information may be provided here. This author does not need an account on the AOP-KB and can be distinct from the point of contact below. The list of authors will be included in any snapshot made from an AOP. More help

Malgorzata Nepelska, Elise Grignard, Sharon Munn,

Systems Toxicology Unit, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, Joint Research Centre, European Commission, Via E. Fermi 2749, I-21027 Ispra, Varese, Italy

Corresponding author:;

Point of Contact

Indicate the point of contact for the AOP-KB entry itself. This person is responsible for managing the AOP entry in the AOP-KB and controls write access to the page by defining the contributors as described below. Clicking on the name will allow any wiki user to correspond with the point of contact via the email address associated with their user profile in the AOP-KB. This person can be the same as the corresponding author listed in the authors section but isn’t required to be. In cases where the individuals are different, the corresponding author would be the appropriate person to contact for scientific issues whereas the point of contact would be the appropriate person to contact about technical issues with the AOP-KB entry itself. Corresponding authors and the point of contact are encouraged to monitor comments on their AOPs and develop or coordinate responses as appropriate.  More help
Arthur Author   (email point of contact)


List user names of all  authors contributing to or revising pages in the AOP-KB that are linked to the AOP description. This information is mainly used to control write access to the AOP page and is controlled by the Point of Contact.  More help
  • Elise Grignard
  • Arthur Author


The status section is used to provide AOP-KB users with information concerning how actively the AOP page is being developed, what type of use or input the authors feel comfortable with given the current level of development, and whether it is part of the OECD AOP Development Workplan and has been reviewed and/or endorsed. “Author Status” is an author defined field that is designated by selecting one of several options from a drop-down menu (Table 3). The “Author Status” field should be changed by the point of contact, as appropriate, as AOP development proceeds. See page 22 of the User Handbook for definitions of selection options. More help
Author status OECD status OECD project SAAOP status
Open for citation & comment EAGMST Under Review 1.21 Included in OECD Work Plan
This AOP was last modified on May 08, 2022 11:33
The date the AOP was last modified is automatically tracked by the AOP-KB. The date modified field can be used to evaluate how actively the page is under development and how recently the version within the AOP-Wiki has been updated compared to any snapshots that were generated. More help

Revision dates for related pages

Page Revision Date/Time
Activation, PPARα December 28, 2020 12:48
impaired, Fertility December 02, 2016 09:21
Decrease, Steroidogenic acute regulatory protein (STAR) September 16, 2017 10:14
Reduction, Cholesterol transport in mitochondria September 16, 2017 10:14
Reduction, Testosterone synthesis in Leydig cells September 16, 2017 10:14
Reduction, testosterone level September 16, 2017 10:14
Decrease, Translocator protein (TSPO) September 16, 2017 10:14
Malformation, Male reproductive tract September 16, 2017 10:14
Decrease, Steroidogenic acute regulatory protein (STAR) leads to Reduction, Cholesterol transport in mitochondria December 02, 2016 09:28
Reduction, Cholesterol transport in mitochondria leads to Reduction, Testosterone synthesis in Leydig cells December 02, 2016 10:16
Reduction, Testosterone synthesis in Leydig cells leads to Reduction, testosterone level December 02, 2016 10:18
Activation, PPARα leads to Decrease, Steroidogenic acute regulatory protein (STAR) December 02, 2016 10:12
Decrease, Translocator protein (TSPO) leads to Reduction, Cholesterol transport in mitochondria December 02, 2016 10:14
Activation, PPARα leads to Decrease, Translocator protein (TSPO) December 02, 2016 10:13
Malformation, Male reproductive tract leads to impaired, Fertility December 02, 2016 10:21
Reduction, testosterone level leads to Malformation, Male reproductive tract December 02, 2016 10:20


In the abstract section, authors should provide a concise and informative summation of the AOP under development that can stand-alone from the AOP page. Abstracts should typically be 200-400 words in length (similar to an abstract for a journal article). Suggested content for the abstract includes the following: The background/purpose for initiation of the AOP’s development (if there was a specific intent) A brief description of the MIE, AO, and/or major KEs that define the pathway A short summation of the overall WoE supporting the AOP and identification of major knowledge gaps (if any) If a brief statement about how the AOP may be applied (optional). The aim is to capture the highlights of the AOP and its potential scientific and regulatory relevance More help

This AOP links the activation of Peroxisome Proliferator Activated Receptor α (PPARα) to the developmental/reproductive toxicity in male. The development of this AOP relies on evidence collected from rodent models and incorporates human mechanistic and epidemiological data. The PPARα is a ligand-activated transcription factor that belongs to the nuclear receptor family, which also includes the steroid and thyroid hormone receptors. The hypothesis that PPARα action is the mechanistic basis for effects on the reproductive system arises from limited experimental data indicating relationships between activation of this receptor and impairment of steroidogenesis leading to reproductive toxicity. PPARs play important roles in the metabolic regulation of lipids, of which cholesterol, in particular, being a precursor of steroid hormones, makes the link between lipid metabolism to effects on reproduction. The key events in the pathway comprise the activation of PPARα, followed by the disruption cholesterol transport in mitochondria, impairment of hormonal balance which leads to malformation of the reproductive tract in males which may lead to impaired fertility. The PPARα-initiated AOP to rodent male developmental toxicity is a first step for structuring current knowledge about a mode of action which is neither AR-mediated nor via direct steroidogenesis enzymes inhibition. In the current form the pathway lays a strong basis for linking an endocrine mode of action with an apical endpoint, a prerequisite requirement for the identification of endocrine disrupting chemicals. This AOP is complemented with a structured data collection which will serve as the basis for further quantitative development of the pathway.

Background (optional)

This optional subsection should be used to provide background information for AOP reviewers and users that is considered helpful in understanding the biology underlying the AOP and the motivation for its development. The background should NOT provide an overview of the AOP, its KEs or KERs, which are captured in more detail below. Examples of potential uses of the optional background section are listed on pages 24-25 of the User Handbook. More help

Summary of the AOP

This section is for information that describes the overall AOP. The information described in section 1 is entered on the upper portion of an AOP page within the AOP-Wiki. This is where some background information may be provided, the structure of the AOP is described, and the KEs and KERs are listed. More help


Molecular Initiating Events (MIE)
An MIE is a specialised KE that represents the beginning (point of interaction between a stressor and the biological system) of an AOP. More help
Key Events (KE)
This table summarises all of the KEs of the AOP. This table is populated in the AOP-Wiki as KEs are added to the AOP. Each table entry acts as a link to the individual KE description page.  More help
Adverse Outcomes (AO)
An AO is a specialised KE that represents the end (an adverse outcome of regulatory significance) of an AOP.  More help
Sequence Type Event ID Title Short name
1 MIE 227 Activation, PPARα Activation, PPARα
2 KE 266 Decrease, Steroidogenic acute regulatory protein (STAR) Decrease, Steroidogenic acute regulatory protein (STAR)
3 KE 447 Reduction, Cholesterol transport in mitochondria Reduction, Cholesterol transport in mitochondria
4 KE 413 Reduction, Testosterone synthesis in Leydig cells Reduction, Testosterone synthesis in Leydig cells
5 KE 446 Reduction, testosterone level Reduction, testosterone level
6 KE 289 Decrease, Translocator protein (TSPO) Decrease, Translocator protein (TSPO)
7 AO 406 impaired, Fertility impaired, Fertility
8 AO 348 Malformation, Male reproductive tract Malformation, Male reproductive tract

Relationships Between Two Key Events (Including MIEs and AOs)

This table summarises all of the KERs of the AOP and is populated in the AOP-Wiki as KERs are added to the AOP. Each table entry acts as a link to the individual KER description page.To add a key event relationship click on either Add relationship: events adjacent in sequence or Add relationship: events non-adjacent in sequence.For example, if the intended sequence of KEs for the AOP is [KE1 > KE2 > KE3 > KE4]; relationships between KE1 and KE2; KE2 and KE3; and KE3 and KE4 would be defined using the add relationship: events adjacent in sequence button.  Relationships between KE1 and KE3; KE2 and KE4; or KE1 and KE4, for example, should be created using the add relationship: events non-adjacent button. This helps to both organize the table with regard to which KERs define the main sequence of KEs and those that provide additional supporting evidence and aids computational analysis of AOP networks, where non-adjacent KERs can result in artifacts (see Villeneuve et al. 2018; DOI: 10.1002/etc.4124).After clicking either option, the user will be brought to a new page entitled ‘Add Relationship to AOP.’ To create a new relationship, select an upstream event and a downstream event from the drop down menus. The KER will automatically be designated as either adjacent or non-adjacent depending on the button selected. The fields “Evidence” and “Quantitative understanding” can be selected from the drop-down options at the time of creation of the relationship, or can be added later. See the Users Handbook, page 52 (Assess Evidence Supporting All KERs for guiding questions, etc.).  Click ‘Create [adjacent/non-adjacent] relationship.’  The new relationship should be listed on the AOP page under the heading “Relationships Between Two Key Events (Including MIEs and AOs)”. To edit a key event relationship, click ‘Edit’ next to the name of the relationship you wish to edit. The user will be directed to an Editing Relationship page where they can edit the Evidence, and Quantitative Understanding fields using the drop down menus. Once finished editing, click ‘Update [adjacent/non-adjacent] relationship’ to update these fields and return to the AOP page.To remove a key event relationship to an AOP page, under Summary of the AOP, next to “Relationships Between Two Key Events (Including MIEs and AOs)” click ‘Remove’ The relationship should no longer be listed on the AOP page under the heading “Relationships Between Two Key Events (Including MIEs and AOs)”. More help

Network View

The AOP-Wiki automatically generates a network view of the AOP. This network graphic is based on the information provided in the MIE, KEs, AO, KERs and WoE summary tables. The width of the edges representing the KERs is determined by its WoE confidence level, with thicker lines representing higher degrees of confidence. This network view also shows which KEs are shared with other AOPs. More help


The stressor field is a structured data field that can be used to annotate an AOP with standardised terms identifying stressors known to trigger the MIE/AOP. Most often these are chemical names selected from established chemical ontologies. However, depending on the information available, this could also refer to chemical categories (i.e., groups of chemicals with defined structural features known to trigger the MIE). It can also include non-chemical stressors such as genetic or environmental factors. Although AOPs themselves are not chemical or stressor-specific, linking to stressor terms known to be relevant to different AOPs can aid users in searching for AOPs that may be relevant to a given stressor. More help

Life Stage Applicability

Identify the life stage for which the KE is known to be applicable. More help
Life stage Evidence
Development High

Taxonomic Applicability

Latin or common names of a species or broader taxonomic grouping (e.g., class, order, family) can be selected. In many cases, individual species identified in these structured fields will be those for which the strongest evidence used in constructing the AOP was available in relation to this KE. More help
Term Scientific Term Evidence Link
rat Rattus norvegicus Moderate NCBI
human Homo sapiens Low NCBI
mouse Mus musculus Moderate NCBI

Sex Applicability

The authors must select from one of the following: Male, female, mixed, asexual, third gender, hermaphrodite, or unspecific. More help
Sex Evidence
Male High

Overall Assessment of the AOP

This section addresses the relevant biological domain of applicability (i.e., in terms of taxa, sex, life stage, etc.) and WoE for the overall AOP as a basis to consider appropriate regulatory application (e.g., priority setting, testing strategies or risk assessment). The goal of the overall assessment is to provide a high level synthesis and overview of the relative confidence in the AOP and where the significant gaps or weaknesses are (if they exist). Users or readers can drill down into the finer details captured in the KE and KER descriptions, and/or associated summary tables, as appropriate to their needs.Assessment of the AOP is organised into a number of steps. Guidance on pages 59-62 of the User Handbook is available to facilitate assignment of categories of high, moderate, or low confidence for each consideration. While it is not necessary to repeat lengthy text that appears elsewhere in the AOP description (or related KE and KER descriptions), a brief explanation or rationale for the selection of high, moderate, or low confidence should be made. More help

Biological plausibility, coherence, and consistency of the experimental evidence

In the presented AOP it is hypothesized that the key events occur in a biologically plausible order prior to the development of adverse outcomes. The PPARα activators have been shown to alter steroidogenesis and impair reproduction [see reviews (Corton and Lapinskas 2004), (Latini et al. 2008), (David 2006)]. However, there are some conflicting reports on the involvement of PPARα as MIE of the proposed AOP (Johnson, Heger, and Boekelheide 2012), (David 2006). The biochemistry of steroidogenesis and the predominant role of the gonad in synthesis of the sex steroids are well established. Steroidogenesis is a complex process that is dependent on the availability of cholesterol in mitochondria. Perturbation of genes responsible for cholesterol transport and steroidogenic enzyme activities in the Leydig cell will lead to a decrease in testicular testosterone (T) production. As a consequence, androgen-dependent tissue differentiation/development is adversely affected. The physical manifestation of this event may be reproductive tract malformation and possibly leads to impaired fertility.

Concordance of dose-response relationships

This is a qualitative description of the pathway; the currently available studies provide quantitative information on dose-response relationships only partially. Experimental data are based on exposure to phthalates and indicate that key events of this pathway occur at similar dose levels. The effects of altered gene expression levels that are responsible for the cholesterol transport into the Leydig cells were shown at >50 mg/kg/bw, a dose at which foetal T was decreased and anatomical malformations (hypospadias) were produced (Mylchreest, Cattley, and Foster 1998), (Mylchreest 2000), (Akingbemi 2001), (Lehmann et al. 2004). Tailored experiments are required for the exploration of quantitative linkages.

Temporal concordance among the key events and the adverse outcome

This AOP bridges two life stages: the AOs are results of the chemical exposure during a critical prenatal period for male development, the masculinization programming window (MPW), within which androgens must act to ensure the correct development of the male reproductive tract (Welsh et al. 2008). Therefore, the AOP focuses on the exposures within the MPW (15.5–18.5 GD days in rats). The temporal relationship of exposure to gestation day has been investigated using phthalates and it has been demonstrated that the gestational timing of exposure is important for the production of the adverse effects on the male reproductive tract (reviewed in (Ema 2002)). Moreover, the temporal relationship between alterations of gene expression and changes in testosterone production has been investigated for phthalates (DBP) (Lehmann et al. 2004), (Thompson et al. 2005). Initial increases in gene expression are followed by decreases in the expression of genes which are associated with steroidogenesis. The observed decreased steroidogenesis and subsequent decrease in testosterone levels is well established as precursors to anatomical changes in the developing male reproductive tract. Thus, those key events of gene expression are temporally consistent with subsequent events, however complete temporal concordance studies are missing.

Strength, consistency, and specificity of association of adverse effect and initiating event

The strength of the chosen chemical initiators as PPARα activators was shown to partially correlate with their ability to act as a male reproductive toxicant (Corton and Lapinskas 2004). The presented key events leading to a decrease in steroidogenesis are plausible and consistent with the observed effects. There is coherence between decreased testosterone synthesis and malformations.

Alternative mechanism(s) or MIE(s) described which may contribute/synergise the postulated AOP

The inhibitory effect of PPARα activation seems to be attributable to an impairment of the multistep process of cholesterol mobilization, transport into mitochondria, and steroidogenesis leading to impaired androgens production. Therefore, it is plausible that several other mechanisms may contribute to/synergise with this AOP. For example, activation of other isoforms of PPARs (PPARβ/δ or/and γ) is hypothesised to be relevant for the pathway (Lapinskas et al. 2005), (Shipley and Waxman 2004).

PPARγ activation

Opposing effects of PPARγ ligands (thiazolidinediones, TZD) on androgen levels and/or production in male humans (Dunaif et al. 1996), (Bloomgarden, Futterweit, and Poretsky 2001), (Vierhapper, Nowotny, and Waldhäusl 2003) and animal models have been described (Kempná et al. 2007), (Gasic et al. 1998), (Mu et al. 2000), (Arlt, Auchus, and Miller 2001), (Minge, Robker, and Norman 2008), (Gasic et al. 2001), (Veldhuis, Zhang, and Garmey 2002). In rats no effects of PPARγ ligand (rosiglitazone) on production or total circulating testosterone levels were seen (Boberg et al. 2008), however a decrease in basal or induced testosterone production occurred in the Leydig cells of rosiglitazone-treated rats (Couto et al. 2010).

Moreover, there are contradicting reports as to the presence of PPARγ in the foetal testes (Hannas et al. 2012). Few others transcription factors involved in regulation of lipid metabolism are hypothesized to mediate effects on fetal Leydig cell gene expression like sterol regulatory element–binding protein (SREBP) (Lehmann et al. 2004), (Shultz 2001), CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein-β (CEBPB) (Kuhl, Ross, and Gaido 2007) or NR5A1 (also known as steroidogenic factor 1; Sf1) (Borch et al. 2006). The downstream effects in the pathway might be due to the constellation of earlier events in fetal Leydig cells leading to decrease testosterone production and connected adverse outcomes. Alternative/synergistic MIEs relating to this pathway are hypothesised in the KER description. At present there are no strong views on the other possible MIEs.

Uncertainties, inconsistencies and data gaps

The major uncertainty in this AOP is the functional relationship between (MIE) PPARα activation leading to cholesterol transport reduction; possible mechanisms have been proposed but strong experimental support is missing and some conflicting data are reported. The dose response data to support this relationship are lacking. Studies exploring the role of PPARα using PPARα knockout mice showed that prenatal exposure to phthalates caused developmental malformations in both wild-type and PPARα knockout mice, thus suggesting a PPARα-independent mechanism. However, it is difficult to draw any conclusion on the role of PPARα in phthalate-related reproductive toxicity since the intrauterine administration of phthalate (DEHP) occurred before the critical period of reproductive tract differentiation (Peters et al. 1997). Intrauterine DEHP-treated PPARα-deficient mice, developed delayed testicular, renal and developmental toxicities, but no liver toxicity, compared to wild types, thus confirming the early observation by Lee et al. about the PPARα dependence of liver response and, more importantly, indicating that DEHP may induce reproductive toxicity through both PPARα-dependent and -independent mechanism (Ward et al. 1998). PPARα-independent reproductive toxicity observed by Ward et al. may conceivably be mediated by other PPAR isoforms, such as PPARβ and PPARγ, or by a non-receptor-mediated organ-specific mechanism (Barak et al. 1999). Other studies showed that the administration of DEHP resulted in milder testis lesions and higher testosterone levels in PPARα-null mice than in wild-type mice (Gazouli 2002). A more recent report, investigating the role of PPARα, showed decreased testosterone levels in PPARα(−/−) null control mice, suggesting a positive constitutive role for PPARα in maintaining Leydig cell steroid formation (Borch et al. 2006).

Inconsistencies Genomic studies by Hannas et al., demonstrated that PPARα agonist Wy-14,643, did not reduce foetal testicular testosterone production following gestational day 14–18 exposure, suggesting that the antiandrogenic activity of phthalates is not PPARα mediated (Hannas et al. 2012). Similarly, recent report by Furr et al. did not observe testosterone decrease after administration of Wy-14,643 in rat ( ex vivo) (Furr et al. 2014).

Data Gaps: Complete/pathway driven studies to investigate the effects of PPARs and their role in male reproductive development are lacking. For establishing a solid quantitative and temporal coherent linkage, mode of action framework analysis for PPAR α mediated developmental toxicity are needed. This approach has been applied for the involvement of PPAR α in liver toxicity (Corton et al. 2014), (Wood et al. 2014).

Domain of Applicability

The relevant biological domain(s) of applicability in terms of sex, life-stage, taxa, and other aspects of biological context are defined in this section. Biological domain of applicability is informed by the “Description” and “Biological Domain of Applicability” sections of each KE and KER description (see sections 2G and 3E for details). In essence the taxa/life-stage/sex applicability is defined based on the groups of organisms for which the measurements represented by the KEs can feasibly be measured and the functional and regulatory relationships represented by the KERs are operative.The relevant biological domain of applicability of the AOP as a whole will nearly always be defined based on the most narrowly restricted of its KEs and KERs. For example, if most of the KEs apply to either sex, but one is relevant to females only, the biological domain of applicability of the AOP as a whole would be limited to females. While much of the detail defining the domain of applicability may be found in the individual KE and KER descriptions, the rationale for defining the relevant biological domain of applicability of the overall AOP should be briefly summarised on the AOP page. More help

Empirical information on dose-response relationships between the KEs, are not available, however there are solid empirical data that would inform a computational, predictive model for reproductive toxicity via PPARα activation.

Life Stage Applicability

This AOP is relevant for developing (prenatal) male.

Taxonomic Applicability

The experimental support for the pathway is mainly based on the animal (rat studies). Conflicting reports comes from the studies on mouse. Studies in mice report contradictory results. Recently, studies by Furr et al revealed that fetal T production can be inhibited by exposure to a phthalates in utero (CD-1 mice), but at a higher dose level than required in rats and causing systemic effects (Furr et al. 2014). However there are some earlier reports that chronic dietary administration of phthalates produces adverse testicular effects and reduces fertility in CD-1 mice (Heindel et al. 1989)

Sex Applicability

This AOP applies to males only.

Essentiality of the Key Events

An important aspect of assessing an AOP is evaluating the essentiality of its KEs. The essentiality of KEs can only be assessed relative to the impact of manipulation of a given KE (e.g., experimentally blocking or exacerbating the event) on the downstream sequence of KEs defined for the AOP. Consequently evidence supporting essentiality is assembled on the AOP page, rather than on the independent KE pages that are meant to stand-alone as modular units without reference to other KEs in the sequence.The nature of experimental evidence that is relevant to assessing essentiality relates to the impact on downstream KEs and the AO if upstream KEs are prevented or modified. This includes: Direct evidence: directly measured experimental support that blocking or preventing a KE prevents or impacts downstream KEs in the pathway in the expected fashion. Indirect evidence: evidence that modulation or attenuation in the magnitude of impact on a specific KE (increased effect or decreased effect) is associated with corresponding changes (increases or decreases) in the magnitude or frequency of one or more downstream KEs.When assembling the support for essentiality of the KEs, authors should organise relevant data in a tabular format. The objective is to summarise briefly the nature and numbers of investigations in which the essentiality of KEs has been experimentally explored either directly or indirectly. See pages 50-51 in the User Handbook for further definitions and clarifications.  More help



Essentiality - KEs

level of confidence


PPAR alpha, Activation

PPAR alpha activation was found to indirectly alter the expression of genes involved in cholesterol transport in mitochondria

very weak

TSPO; StAR decrease

Alterations in the amount of cholesterol transport proteins in mitochondria impact on the levels of substrate for steroid hormones production.


cholesterol transport in mitochondria, reduction

Production of steroid hormones depends on the availability of cholesterol to the enzymes in the mitochondrial matrix. Decreasing the amount of cholesterol inside the mitochondria will result in a diminished amount of substrate for hormone (testosterone) synthesis.


Testosterone synthesis, reduction

The gonads are generally considered the major source of circulating androgens. Consequently, if testosterone synthesis by testes is reduced, testosterone concentrations would be expected to decrease unless there are concurrent reductions in the rate of T catabolism.


Testosterone, reduction

Male sexual differentiation in general depends on androgens (T, dihydrotestosterone (DHT)), disturbances in the balance of this endocrine system by either endogenous or exogenous factors lead to male reproductive tract malformation.


Male reproductive tract malformations

Androgens regulate masculinization of the external genitalia. Therefore any defects in androgen biosynthesis, metabolism or action during foetal development can reproductive tract malformation.


Fertility, impaired

Impaired fertility is the endpoint of reproductive toxicity


Evidence Assessment

The biological plausibility, empirical support, and quantitative understanding from each KER in an AOP are assessed together.  Biological plausibility of each of the KERs in the AOP is the most influential consideration in assessing WoE or degree of confidence in an overall hypothesised AOP for potential regulatory application (Meek et al., 2014; 2014a). Empirical support entails consideration of experimental data in terms of the associations between KEs – namely dose-response concordance and temporal relationships between and across multiple KEs. It is examined most often in studies of dose-response/incidence and temporal relationships for stressors that impact the pathway. While less influential than biological plausibility of the KERs and essentiality of the KEs, empirical support can increase confidence in the relationships included in an AOP. For clarification on how to rate the given empirical support for a KER, as well as examples, see pages 53- 55 of the User Handbook.  More help



Biological plausibility

Level of confidence

Empirical Support

Level of confidence







PPAR alpha, Activation


Translator protein (TSPO), Decrease

There is functional relationship between PPARα activation and reduction in TSPO levels.

Very Weak

  • KEs occur at similar dose levels
  • occurrence of the key events at similar dose and time point
  • Support for solid temporal relationship is lacking

Very Weak

Some conflicting data

PPAR alpha, Activation


Steroidogenic acute regulatory protein (StAR), decrease

There is functional relationship between PPARα activation and reduction in StAR levels.


  • KEs occur at similar dose levels
  • Support for solid temporal relationship is lacking.


Some conflicting data

Steroidogenic acute regulatory protein (StAR), decrease and Translator protein (TSPO), Decrease


cholesterol transport in mitochondria, reduction

Changes in cholesterol transport proteins can generally be assumed to directly impact levels of cholesterol transport.


  • KEs occur at similar dose levels
  • Support for solid temporal relationship is lacking.


Some conflicting data

cholesterol transport in mitochondria, reduction


testosterone synthesis, reduction

Decreasing the amount of cholesterol inside the mitochondria (e. g by decreasing the expression of enzymes like StAR or TSOP) will result in a diminished amount of substrate for hormone (testosterone) synthesis.


  • KEs occur at similar dose levels
  • occurrence of the key events at similar dose and time point
  • Support for solid temporal relationship is lacking.


Some conflicting data

testosterone, reduction


Male reproductive tract malformations

Reduction in testosterone (T) levels produced in the Leydig cell subsequently lowers the availability of its metabolite; Dihydrotestosterone (DHT).that regulates masculinization of external genitalia. Therefore any defects in androgen biosynthesis, metabolism or action during development can cause male reproductive tract malformation.


  • KEs occur at similar dose levels
  • occurrence of the key events at similar dose and time point
  • Support for solid temporal relationship is lacking.


No conflicting data

Male reproductive tract malformations


Fertility, impaired

Male reproductive tract malformations (congenital malformation of male genitalia) comprise any physical abnormality of the male internal or external genitalia present at birth, which may impair on fertility later in life


  • KEs occur at similar dose levels
  • occurrence of the key events at similar dose and time point

Support for solid temporal relationship is lacking.


No conflicting data

Table 1 Weight of Evidence Summary Table. The underlying questions for the content of the table: Dose-response Does the empirical evidence support that a change in KEup leads to an appropriate change in KEdown?; Does KEup occur at lower doses and earlier time points than KE down and is the incidence of KEup > than that for KEdown?: Incidence Is there higher incidence of KEup than of KEdown?; Inconsistencies/Uncertainties: Are there inconsistencies in empirical support across taxa, species and stressors that don’t align with expected pattern for hypothesized AOP? n.a not applicable

Quantitative Understanding

Some proof of concept examples to address the WoE considerations for AOPs quantitatively have recently been developed, based on the rank ordering of the relevant Bradford Hill considerations (i.e., biological plausibility, essentiality and empirical support) (Becker et al., 2017; Becker et al, 2015; Collier et al., 2016). Suggested quantitation of the various elements is expert derived, without collective consideration currently of appropriate reporting templates or formal expert engagement. Though not essential, developers may wish to assign comparative quantitative values to the extent of the supporting data based on the three critical Bradford Hill considerations for AOPs, as a basis to contribute to collective experience.Specific attention is also given to how precisely and accurately one can potentially predict an impact on KEdownstream based on some measurement of KEupstream. This is captured in the form of quantitative understanding calls for each KER. See pages 55-56 of the User Handbook for a review of quantitative understanding for KER's. More help

This AOP is qualitatively described; however it contains also data that may be used for further development of quantitative description.

Considerations for Potential Applications of the AOP (optional)

At their discretion, the developer may include in this section discussion of the potential applications of an AOP to support regulatory decision-making. This may include, for example, possible utility for test guideline development or refinement, development of integrated testing and assessment approaches, development of (Q)SARs / or chemical profilers to facilitate the grouping of chemicals for subsequent read-across, screening level hazard assessments or even risk assessment. While it is challenging to foresee all potential regulatory application of AOPs and any application will ultimately lie within the purview of regulatory agencies, potential applications may be apparent as the AOP is being developed, particularly if it was initiated with a particular application in mind. This optional section is intended to provide the developer with an opportunity to suggest potential regulatory applications and describe his or her rationale.To edit the “Considerations for Potential Applications of the AOP” section, on an AOP page, in the upper right hand menu, click ‘Edit.’ This brings you to a page entitled, “Editing AOP.” Scroll down to the “Considerations for Potential Applications of the AOP” section, where a text entry box allows you to submit text. In the upper right hand menu, click ‘Update AOP’ to save your changes and return to the AOP page or 'Update and continue' to continue editing AOP text sections.  The new text should appear under the “Considerations for Potential Applications of the AOP” section on the AOP page. More help

1. The AOP describes a pathway which allows for the detection of sex steroid--related endocrine disrupting modes of action, with focus on the identification of substances which affect the reproductive system. In the current form the pathway lays a strong basis for linking endocrine mode of action with an apical endpoint, a prerequisite requirement for identification of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDC).

EDCs require specific evaluation under REACH (1907/2006, Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (EU, 2006)), the revised European plant protection product regulation 1107/2009 (EU, 2009) and use of biocidal products 528/2012 EC (EU, 2012).Amongst other agencies the US EPA is also giving particular attention to EDCs (EPA, 1998).

2. This AOP structurally represents current knowledge of the pathway from PPARα activation to impaired fertility that may provide a basis for development (and interpretation) of strategies for Integrated Approaches to Testing Assessment (IATA) to identify similar substances that may operate via the same pathway related tosex steroids disruptionand effects on reproductive tract and fertility. This AOP forms the starting point on an AOP network mapping to modes of action for endocrine disruption.

3. The AOP could inform the development of quantitative structure activity relationships, read-across models, and/or systems biology models to prioritize chemicals for further testing.


List the bibliographic references to original papers, books or other documents used to support the AOP. More help

Akingbemi, B. T. 2001. “Modulation of Rat Leydig Cell Steroidogenic Function by Di(2-Ethylhexyl)Phthalate.” Biology of Reproduction 65 (4) (October 1): 1252–1259. doi:10.1095/biolreprod65.4.1252.

Arlt, W, R J Auchus, and W L Miller. 2001. “Thiazolidinediones but Not Metformin Directly Inhibit the Steroidogenic Enzymes P450c17 and 3beta -Hydroxysteroid Dehydrogenase.” The Journal of Biological Chemistry 276 (20) (May 18): 16767–71. doi:10.1074/jbc.M100040200.

Barak, Y, M C Nelson, E S Ong, Y Z Jones, P Ruiz-Lozano, K R Chien, A Koder, and R M Evans. 1999. “PPAR Gamma Is Required for Placental, Cardiac, and Adipose Tissue Development.” Molecular Cell 4 (4) (October): 585–95.

Bloomgarden, Z T, W Futterweit, and L Poretsky. 2001. “Use of Insulin-Sensitizing Agents in Patients with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome.” Endocrine Practice : Official Journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 7 (4): 279–86. doi:10.4158/EP.7.4.279.

Boberg, Julie, Stine Metzdorff, Rasmus Wortziger, Marta Axelstad, Leon Brokken, Anne Marie Vinggaard, Majken Dalgaard, and Christine Nellemann. 2008. “Impact of Diisobutyl Phthalate and Other PPAR Agonists on Steroidogenesis and Plasma Insulin and Leptin Levels in Fetal Rats.” Toxicology 250 (2-3) (September 4): 75–81. doi:10.1016/j.tox.2008.05.020.

Borch, Julie, Stine Broeng Metzdorff, Anne Marie Vinggaard, Leon Brokken, and Majken Dalgaard. 2006. “Mechanisms Underlying the Anti-Androgenic Effects of Diethylhexyl Phthalate in Fetal Rat Testis.” Toxicology 223 (1-2) (June 1): 144–55. doi:10.1016/j.tox.2006.03.015.

Corton, J Christopher, Michael L Cunningham, B Timothy Hummer, Christopher Lau, Bette Meek, Jeffrey M Peters, James A Popp, Lorenz Rhomberg, Jennifer Seed, and James E Klaunig. 2014. “Mode of Action Framework Analysis for Receptor-Mediated Toxicity: The Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor Alpha (PPARα) as a Case Study.” Critical Reviews in Toxicology 44 (1) (January): 1–49. doi:10.3109/10408444.2013.835784.

Corton, J. Christopher, and Paula J Lapinskas. 2004. “Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors: Mediators of Phthalate Ester-Induced Effects in the Male Reproductive Tract?” Toxicological Sciences 83 (1) (October 13): 4–17. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfi011.

Couto, Janaína A, Karina L A Saraiva, Cleiton D Barros, Daniel P Udrisar, Christina A Peixoto, Juliany S B César Vieira, Maria C Lima, Suely L Galdino, Ivan R Pitta, and Maria I Wanderley. 2010. “Effect of Chronic Treatment with Rosiglitazone on Leydig Cell Steroidogenesis in Rats: In Vivo and Ex Vivo Studies.” Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology : RB&E 8 (1) (January): 13. doi:10.1186/1477-7827-8-13.

David, RM. 2006. “Proposed Mode of Action for in Utero Effects of Some Phthalate Esters on the Developing Male Reproductive Tract.” Toxicologic Pathology. doi:10.1080/01926230600642625.

Dunaif, A, D Scott, D Finegood, B Quintana, and R Whitcomb. 1996. “The Insulin-Sensitizing Agent Troglitazone Improves Metabolic and Reproductive Abnormalities in the Polycystic Ovary Syndrome.” The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 81 (9) (September): 3299–306. doi:10.1210/jcem.81.9.8784087.

Ema, Makoto. 2002. “Antiandrogenic Effects of Dibutyl Phthalate and Its Metabolite, Monobutyl Phthalate, in Rats.” Congenital Anomalies 42 (4) (December): 297–308. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4520.2002.tb00896.x.

Furr, Johnathan R, Christy S Lambright, Vickie S Wilson, Paul M Foster, and Leon E Gray. 2014. “A Short-Term in Vivo Screen Using Fetal Testosterone Production, a Key Event in the Phthalate Adverse Outcome Pathway, to Predict Disruption of Sexual Differentiation.” Toxicological Sciences : An Official Journal of the Society of Toxicology 140 (2) (August 1): 403–24. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfu081.

Gasic, S, Y Bodenburg, M Nagamani, A Green, and R J Urban. 1998. “Troglitazone Inhibits Progesterone Production in Porcine Granulosa Cells.” Endocrinology 139 (12) (December): 4962–6. doi:10.1210/endo.139.12.6385.

Gasic, S, M Nagamani, A Green, and R J Urban. 2001. “Troglitazone Is a Competitive Inhibitor of 3beta-Hydroxysteroid Dehydrogenase Enzyme in the Ovary.” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 184 (4) (March): 575–9. doi:10.1067/mob.2001.111242.

Gazouli, M. 2002. “Effect of Peroxisome Proliferators on Leydig Cell Peripheral-Type Benzodiazepine Receptor Gene Expression, Hormone-Stimulated Cholesterol Transport, and Steroidogenesis: Role of the Peroxisome Proliferator-Activator Receptor .” Endocrinology 143 (7) (July 1): 2571–2583. doi:10.1210/en.143.7.2571.

Hannas, Bethany R, Christy S Lambright, Johnathan Furr, Nicola Evans, Paul M D Foster, Earl L Gray, and Vickie S Wilson. 2012. “Genomic Biomarkers of Phthalate-Induced Male Reproductive Developmental Toxicity: A Targeted RT-PCR Array Approach for Defining Relative Potency.” Toxicological Sciences : An Official Journal of the Society of Toxicology 125 (2) (February): 544–57. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfr315.

Heindel, J J, D K Gulati, R C Mounce, S R Russell, and J C Lamb. 1989. “Reproductive Toxicity of Three Phthalic Acid Esters in a Continuous Breeding Protocol.” Fundamental and Applied Toxicology : Official Journal of the Society of Toxicology 12 (3) (April): 508–18.

Johnson, Kamin J, Nicholas E Heger, and Kim Boekelheide. 2012. “Of Mice and Men (and Rats): Phthalate-Induced Fetal Testis Endocrine Disruption Is Species-Dependent.” Toxicological Sciences : An Official Journal of the Society of Toxicology 129 (2) (October): 235–48. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfs206.

Kempná, Petra, Gaby Hofer, Primus E Mullis, and Christa E Flück. 2007. “Pioglitazone Inhibits Androgen Production in NCI-H295R Cells by Regulating Gene Expression of CYP17 and HSD3B2.” Molecular Pharmacology 71 (3) (March): 787–98. doi:10.1124/mol.106.028902.

Kuhl, Adam J, Susan M Ross, and Kevin W Gaido. 2007. “CCAAT/enhancer Binding Protein Beta, but Not Steroidogenic Factor-1, Modulates the Phthalate-Induced Dysregulation of Rat Fetal Testicular Steroidogenesis.” Endocrinology 148 (12) (December): 5851–64. doi:10.1210/en.2007-0930.

Lapinskas, Paula J., Sherri Brown, Lisa M. Leesnitzer, Steven Blanchard, Cyndi Swanson, Russell C. Cattley, and J. Christopher Corton. 2005. “Role of PPARα in Mediating the Effects of Phthalates and Metabolites in the Liver.” Toxicology 207 (1): 149–163.

Latini, Giuseppe, Egeria Scoditti, Alberto Verrotti, Claudio De Felice, and Marika Massaro. 2008. “Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors as Mediators of Phthalate-Induced Effects in the Male and Female Reproductive Tract: Epidemiological and Experimental Evidence.” PPAR Research 2008 (January): 359267. doi:10.1155/2008/359267.

Lehmann, Kim P, Suzanne Phillips, Madhabananda Sar, Paul M D Foster, and Kevin W Gaido. 2004. “Dose-Dependent Alterations in Gene Expression and Testosterone Synthesis in the Fetal Testes of Male Rats Exposed to Di (n-Butyl) Phthalate.” Toxicological Sciences : An Official Journal of the Society of Toxicology 81 (1) (September 1): 60–8. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfh169.

Minge, Cadence E, Rebecca L Robker, and Robert J Norman. 2008. “PPAR Gamma: Coordinating Metabolic and Immune Contributions to Female Fertility.” PPAR Research 2008 (January): 243791. doi:10.1155/2008/243791.

Mu, Y M, T Yanase, Y Nishi, N Waseda, T Oda, A Tanaka, R Takayanagi, and H Nawata. 2000. “Insulin Sensitizer, Troglitazone, Directly Inhibits Aromatase Activity in Human Ovarian Granulosa Cells.” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 271 (3) (May 19): 710–3. doi:10.1006/bbrc.2000.2701.

Mylchreest, Eve. 2000. “Dose-Dependent Alterations in Androgen-Regulated Male Reproductive Development in Rats Exposed to Di(n-Butyl) Phthalate during Late Gestation.” Toxicological Sciences 55 (1) (May 1): 143–151. doi:10.1093/toxsci/55.1.143.

Mylchreest, Eve, Russell C. Cattley, and Paul M. D. Foster. 1998. “Male Reproductive Tract Malformations in Rats Following Gestational and Lactational Exposure to Di( N -Butyl) Phthalate: An Antiandrogenic Mechanism?” Toxicological Sciences 43 (1) (May 1): 47–60. doi:10.1093/toxsci/43.1.47.

Peters, J M, M W Taubeneck, C L Keen, and F J Gonzalez. 1997. “Di(2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate Induces a Functional Zinc Deficiency during Pregnancy and Teratogenesis That Is Independent of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor-Alpha.” Teratology 56 (5) (November): 311–6. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1096-9926(199711)56:5<311::AID-TERA4>3.0.CO;2-#.

Shipley, Jonathan M, and David J Waxman. 2004. “Simultaneous, Bidirectional Inhibitory Crosstalk between PPAR and STAT5b.” Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 199 (3) (October 15): 275–84. doi:10.1016/j.taap.2003.12.020.

Shultz, V. D. 2001. “Altered Gene Profiles in Fetal Rat Testes after in Utero Exposure to Di(n-Butyl) Phthalate.” Toxicological Sciences 64 (2) (December 1): 233–242. doi:10.1093/toxsci/64.2.233.

Thompson, Christopher J, Susan M Ross, Janan Hensley, Kejun Liu, Susanna C Heinze, S Stanley Young, and Kevin W Gaido. 2005. “Differential Steroidogenic Gene Expression in the Fetal Adrenal Gland versus the Testis and Rapid and Dynamic Response of the Fetal Testis to Di(n-Butyl) Phthalate.” Biology of Reproduction 73 (5) (November): 908–17. doi:10.1095/biolreprod.105.042382.

Veldhuis, Johannes D, George Zhang, and James C Garmey. 2002. “Troglitazone, an Insulin-Sensitizing Thiazolidinedione, Represses Combined Stimulation by LH and Insulin of de Novo Androgen Biosynthesis by Thecal Cells in Vitro.” The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 87 (3) (March): 1129–33. doi:10.1210/jcem.87.3.8308.

Vierhapper, H, P Nowotny, and W Waldhäusl. 2003. “Reduced Production Rates of Testosterone and Dihydrotestosterone in Healthy Men Treated with Rosiglitazone.” Metabolism: Clinical and Experimental 52 (2) (February): 230–2. doi:10.1053/meta.2003.50028.

Ward, J M, J M Peters, C M Perella, and F J Gonzalez. 1998. “Receptor and Nonreceptor-Mediated Organ-Specific Toxicity of di(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) in Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor Alpha-Null Mice.” Toxicologic Pathology 26 (2): 240–6.

Welsh, Michelle, Philippa T K Saunders, Mark Fisken, Hayley M Scott, Gary R Hutchison, Lee B Smith, and Richard M Sharpe. 2008. “Identification in Rats of a Programming Window for Reproductive Tract Masculinization, Disruption of Which Leads to Hypospadias and Cryptorchidism.” The Journal of Clinical Investigation 118 (4) (April): 1479–90. doi:10.1172/JCI34241.

Wood, Charles E, Micheal P Jokinen, Crystal L Johnson, Greg R Olson, Susan Hester, Michael George, Brian N Chorley, et al. 2014. “Comparative Time Course Profiles of Phthalate Stereoisomers in Mice.” Toxicological Sciences : An Official Journal of the Society of Toxicology 139 (1) (May): 21–34. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfu025.