Literature DB >> 25761200

Differences in activation of aryl hydrocarbon receptors of white sturgeon relative to lake sturgeon are predicted by identities of key amino acids in the ligand binding domain.

Jon A Doering, Reza Farmahin1,2, Steve Wiseman, Shawn C Beitel, Sean W Kennedy1,2, John P Giesy3, Markus Hecker4.   

Abstract

Dioxin-like compounds (DLCs) are pollutants of global environmental concern. DLCs elicit their adverse outcomes through activation of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR). However, there is limited understanding of the mechanisms that result in differences in sensitivity to DLCs among different species of fishes. Understanding these mechanisms is critical for protection of the diversity of fishes exposed to DLCs, including endangered species. This study investigated specific mechanisms that drive responses of two endangered fishes, white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus) and lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) to DLCs. It determined whether differences in sensitivity to activation of AhRs (AhR1 and AhR2) can be predicted based on identities of key amino acids in the ligand binding domain (LBD). White sturgeon were 3- to 30-fold more sensitive than lake sturgeon to exposure to 5 different DLCs based on activation of AhR2. There were no differences in sensitivity between white sturgeon and lake sturgeon based on activation of AhR1. Adverse outcomes as a result of exposure to DLCs have been shown to be mediated through activation of AhR2, but not AhR1, in all fishes studied to date. This indicates that white sturgeon are likely to have greater sensitivity in vivo relative to lake sturgeon. Homology modeling and in silico mutagenesis suggests that differences in sensitivity to activation of AhR2 result from differences in key amino acids at position 388 in the LBD of AhR2 of white sturgeon (Ala-388) and lake sturgeon (Thr-388). This indicates that identities of key amino acids in the LBD of AhR2 could be predictive of both in vitro activation by DLCs and in vivo sensitivity to DLCs in these, and potentially other, fishes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25761200     DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00085

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Technol        ISSN: 0013-936X            Impact factor:   9.028


  9 in total

1.  Molecular and Functional Properties of the Atlantic Cod (Gadus morhua) Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptors Ahr1a and Ahr2a.

Authors:  Libe Aranguren-Abadía; Roger Lille-Langøy; Alexander K Madsen; Sibel I Karchner; Diana G Franks; Fekadu Yadetie; Mark E Hahn; Anders Goksøyr; Odd André Karlsen
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2020-01-03       Impact factor: 9.028

2.  In Silico Site-Directed Mutagenesis Informs Species-Specific Predictions of Chemical Susceptibility Derived From the Sequence Alignment to Predict Across Species Susceptibility (SeqAPASS) Tool.

Authors:  Jon A Doering; Sehan Lee; Kurt Kristiansen; Linn Evenseth; Mace G Barron; Ingebrigt Sylte; Carlie A LaLone
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 4.849

3.  Characterization of AHR2 and CYP1A expression in Atlantic sturgeon and shortnose sturgeon treated with coplanar PCBs and TCDD.

Authors:  Nirmal K Roy; Allison Candelmo; Melissa DellaTorre; R Christopher Chambers; Arthur Nádas; Isaac Wirgin
Journal:  Aquat Toxicol       Date:  2018-02-02       Impact factor: 4.964

4.  Characterization of AHR1 and its functional activity in Atlantic sturgeon and shortnose sturgeon.

Authors:  Nirmal K Roy; Melissa DellaTorre; Allison Candelmo; R Christopher Chambers; Ehren Habeck; Isaac Wirgin
Journal:  Aquat Toxicol       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 5.  The Role of Omics in the Application of Adverse Outcome Pathways for Chemical Risk Assessment.

Authors:  Erica K Brockmeier; Geoff Hodges; Thomas H Hutchinson; Emma Butler; Markus Hecker; Knut Erik Tollefsen; Natalia Garcia-Reyero; Peter Kille; Dörthe Becker; Kevin Chipman; John Colbourne; Timothy W Collette; Andrew Cossins; Mark Cronin; Peter Graystock; Steve Gutsell; Dries Knapen; Ioanna Katsiadaki; Anke Lange; Stuart Marshall; Stewart F Owen; Edward J Perkins; Stewart Plaistow; Anthony Schroeder; Daisy Taylor; Mark Viant; Gerald Ankley; Francesco Falciani
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 6.  Building and Applying Quantitative Adverse Outcome Pathway Models for Chemical Hazard and Risk Assessment.

Authors:  Edward J Perkins; Roman Ashauer; Lyle Burgoon; Rory Conolly; Brigitte Landesmann; Cameron Mackay; Cheryl A Murphy; Nathan Pollesch; James R Wheeler; Anze Zupanic; Stefan Scholz
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2019-08-08       Impact factor: 3.742

7.  Epidermal cell cultures from white and green sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus and medirostris): Expression of TGM1-like transglutaminases and CYP4501A.

Authors:  Noreen Karim; Lo-Wei Lin; Joel P Van Eenennaam; Nann A Fangue; Andrea D Schreier; Marjorie A Phillips; Robert H Rice
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Xenobiotic metabolism and its physiological consequences in high-Antarctic Notothenioid fishes.

Authors:  Anneli Strobel; Roger Lille-Langøy; Helmut Segner; Patricia Burkhardt-Holm; Anders Goksøyr; Odd André Karlsen
Journal:  Polar Biol       Date:  2021-12-26       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 9.  Species-Specific Differences in Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Responses: How and Why?

Authors:  Xiaoting Xu; Xi Zhang; Yuzhu Yuan; Yongrui Zhao; Hamza M Fares; Mengjiao Yang; Qing Wen; Reham Taha; Lixin Sun
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-12-10       Impact factor: 5.923

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.