Background: Leydig cells, crucial for testosterone production, express ion channels like ANO1 that influence hormone secretion. This study investigates the expression and role of the Tandem of P domains in a weak inward rectifying K+ channel-related Acid-Sensitive K+-1 (TASK-1) channel in these cells, exploring its impact on testicular function and steroidogenesis. Methods: TASK-1 expression in Leydig cells was confirmed using immunostaining, while RT-PCR and Western Blot (WB) validated its expression in the TM3 Leydig cell line. The effect of a TASK-1 channel blocker on cell viability was assessed through live/dead staining and MTT assays. Additionally, the blocker’s effect on testosterone secretion was evaluated by measuring testosterone levels. Results: Immunohistochemical analysis revealed a predominant presence of TASK- 1, along with c-Kit and ANO-1, in Leydig cells adjacent to seminiferous tubules and also in Sertoli and spermatogenic cells. Expression levels of TASK-1 mRNA and protein were significantly higher in TM3 Leydig cells compared to TM4 Sertoli cells. In addition, blocking TASK-1 in TM3 cells with ML365 induced cell death but did not affect LHinduced testosterone secretion. Conclusions: These findings suggest that TASK-1 in Leydig cells is crucial for their viability and proliferation, highlighting its potential importance in testicular physiology.

In L2 pragmatics, only a few studies have examined task complexity. Furthermore, the existing studies have predominantly focused on the cognitive dimension and have lacked consistent findings. González-Lloret and Ortega (2018) and Pallotti (2019) have thereby contended that socio-interactional features be incorporated into task design. Along this line, this study investigated perceptions of L1 and L2 speakers of English regarding the difficulty of four role-play tasks with differentiated degrees of (dis)preference and imposition. Participants included 33 L1 speakers and 63 Korean L2 speakers at intermediate-level (n = 32) and high-level (n = 31). Results showed that participants’ perceived difficulty matched the design intentions exclusively affected by request size, responsibility for the problem, and persuasion across complex versions of the tasks. Moreover, the linguistic consequences of such factors entailed challenges among L2 speakers. There were also various factors that emerged for task difficulty other than the manipulated task design features, underscoring the importance of participants’ explanatory comments in L2 pragmatics.

We examined the role of L1 writing on L2 writing performance by repeating the same topic twice through L1 writing first and L2 writing later. We designed what we call a ‘L1 + L2 writing task’ and a ‘L2-only writing task’ respectively. In the L1 + L2 writing task, students wrote a text in their L1, and wrote the same topic in L2, by removing the initial L1 essay. We focused on validating which task conditions (± L1 writing) account for the variation in linguistic performance in EFL high-school students’ writing. Our study was conducted with two intact classes (n = 60) assigned to the L2-only, and students from the other two classes (n = 60) assigned to the L1 + L2. The findings indicate that L1 writing may push students to direct their attentional resources toward effective text construction, thereby mitigating a large number of simultaneous demands on attention. We add to empirical knowledge on the effects of L1 writing in task repetition, by exploring how task repetition affected our students’ L2 writing performance.

With the emergence of sociolinguistic approach in second language learning, instructors have begun to acknowledge the native language (L1) as a legitimate tool with the potential to facilitate second language (L2) learning mainly in output-based tasks. This study focuses on how the use of L1 by L2 learners affects their task achievement. Two communicative tasks were used, and tasks were carried out by 32 high school students in L2 only, or in L1 and L2 during group test sessions held on different days. Tape-recorded transcripts of learners when performing the tasks, interviews, and questionnaires were collected and analysed to investigate effect on the use of L1. The findings suggest that during performing the tasks, learners used their L1 to complete their tasks for a variety of functions. Through the L1, they explained and negotiated the task each other, or checked their understanding or compared answers to the task against their peers. To allow the learners to use of their L1 was even more effective than to urge them to use L2 only in a foreign language class using task. Further investigation indicates that, if one of goals of output-based introduction is considered as the successful completion of the task, the learners’ use of L1 may be beneficial to attain the goal when performing completely in L2 is impossible or beyond the learners’ linguistic ability.