| Literature DB >> 26339649 |
Yoshikazu Arai1, Koji Hayakawa2, Daisuke Arai2, Rie Ito3, Yusuke Iwasaki3, Koichi Saito3, Kazuhiko Akutsu4, Satoshi Takatori4, Rie Ishii5, Rumiko Hayashi6, Shun-ichiro Izumi7, Norihiro Sugino8, Fumio Kondo9, Masakazu Horie10, Hiroyuki Nakazawa3, Tsunehisa Makino11, Mitsuko Hirosawa2, Kunio Shiota2, Jun Ohgane12.
Abstract
The regulation of transcription and genome stability by epigenetic systems are crucial for the proper development of mammalian embryos. Chemicals that disturb epigenetic systems are termed epimutagens. We previously performed chemical screening that focused on heterochromatin formation and DNA methylation status in mouse embryonic stem cells and identified five epimutagens: diethyl phosphate (DEP), mercury (Hg), cotinine, selenium (Se), and octachlorodipropyl ether (S-421). Here, we used human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) to confirm the effects of 20 chemicals, including the five epimutagens, detected at low concentrations in maternal peripheral and cord blood samples. Of note, these individual chemicals did not exhibit epimutagenic activity in hiPSCs. However, because the fetal environment contains various chemicals, we evaluated the effects of combined exposure to chemicals (DEP, Hg, cotinine, Se, and S-421) on hiPSCs. The combined exposure caused a decrease in the number of heterochromatin signals and aberrant DNA methylation status at multiple gene loci in hiPSCs. The combined exposure also affected embryoid body formation and neural differentiation from hiPSCs. Therefore, DEP, Hg, cotinine, Se, and S-421 were defined as an "epimutagen combination" that is effective at low concentrations as detected in maternal peripheral and cord blood.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26339649 PMCID: PMC4538592 DOI: 10.1155/2015/876047
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
The chemicals used in the present study.
| Group | Chemical |
aConcentration in serum |
bExposure |
cEffect of chemicals on mESCs | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A, pesticide | 1x | 10x | |||
| 3-PBA | <0.2d (0.3e) | 0.1 | 1.0 | − | |
| TCP | <0.2d (0.9e) | 0.1 | 1.0 | + (10x) | |
| DMP | 4.3 ± 3.9 (8.6 ± 4.2) | 0.1 | 1.0 | + (10x) | |
| DEP | 0.28 ± 0.1 (0.3 ± 0.1) | 0.1 | 1.0 | + (1x) | |
| DMTP | 0.9 ± 0.8 (16.2 ± 4.5) | 0.1 | 1.0 | − | |
| DETP | 2.8 ± 1.8 (7.9 ± 3.0) | 0.1 | 1.0 | + (10x) | |
| DMDTP | ND (0.3e,f) | 0.1 | 1.0 | + (10x) | |
| DEDTP | ND (<0.05d,f) | 0.1 | 1.0 | − | |
| S-421 | ND (10.3g,h) | 0.01 | 0.1 | + (1x) | |
|
| |||||
| B, tobacco | Nicotine | 1.4 ± 0.57 (1.6 ± 2.6)i | 100 | 1000 | − |
| Cotinine | 8.7e (43.7 ± 55.8)i | 100 | 1000 | + (1x) | |
|
| |||||
| C, PFCs | PFOA | 1.4 ± 0.5 (1.5 ± 0.6) | 10 | 100 | − |
| PFOS | 1.4 ± 0.6 (3.9 ± 1.4) | 10 | 100 | − | |
|
| |||||
| D, heavy metals | Sn | ND (1.02 ± 0.51j) | 1.0 | 10 | − |
| Se | ND (110 ± 18) | 100 | 1000 | + (1x) | |
| Cd | 0.042 ± 0.003 (0.038 ± 0.016) | 0.1 | 1.0 | − | |
| Hg | ND (0.6 ± 0.34) | 1.0 | 10 | + (1x) | |
| Pb | 0.3 ± 0.05 (0.3 ± 0.12) | 1.0 | 10 | − | |
|
| |||||
| E, phthalate | DEHP | 4.0 ± 1.1 (5.3 ± 0.8) | 1.2 | 12 | − |
| MEHP | 6.3 ± 5.1 (4.3 ± 1.5) | 5.2 | 52 | + (10x) | |
ND: not determined.
aThe details are in our previous report [12].
b1x: serum level detected in cord blood samples and/or pregnant mothers' serum.
10x: ten-fold higher level than that of the cord blood samples and/or pregnant mothers' serum.
cDescribed in our previous report [12].
dLess than detection limit level.
eDetected only in one sample (n = 11–22).
fConcentrations determined using plasma samples in the previous report [33].
gDetected in all examined samples (n = 58).
hConcentrations determined using human milk samples (ng/g in lipids) in our previous report [12].
iMean ± SD values were calculated using all the samples containing both smokers and nonsmokers. Nicotine and cotinine were detected at relatively high levels (appropriately 100 ppb) from smokers but were not detected from nonsmokers. Thus, the exposure concentrations were determined based on the average values of the smokers' samples.
jConcentrations determined using urine samples in our previous report [12].
Figure 1Outline of this study.
Figure 2Epimutagen screening of hiPSCs. (a) Visualization of heterochromatin structure in nuclei by DAPI staining and immunofluorescence using anti-HP1α antibody. The intensities of signals of DAPI and HP1α on the dotted lines (a-b) were measured using the ImageJ software and plotted. The strong HP1α signals (filled triangles) were confirmed to merge with the DAPI signals. (b) Altered heterochromatin formation after treating hiPSCs with the known epimutagen TSA. hiPSCs were treated with TSA (0, 2, 20, or 40 nM) for 96 h, and heterochromatin was detected using immunofluorescence with anti-HP1α antibodies (red) and DAPI counterstaining (blue). The number of HP1α signals per interphase nucleus was counted using ImageJ software. The number of signals is shown as a box plot. Statistical comparisons of signal number were performed using the Wilcoxon test. ∗ P < 0.01. Scale bar = 10 μm. (c) The number of HP1α signals in hiPSCs exposed to serum levels (1x) or 10-fold increased concentrations (10x) of DEP, Hg, cotinine, Se, or S-421 for 96 h were analyzed. The upper panel shows images of cells exposed to 1x chemicals, and the lower panel presents the number of signals as a box plot. Scale bar = 10 μm. (d) Exposure to the 10x concentrations of TCP, DMP, DETP, DMDTP, and MEHP. All heterochromatin analyses were performed at least twice independently.
Figure 3Exposure to single or multiple chemicals. (a) After 96 h exposure to either of the 10 chemicals that did not affect heterochromatin formation in mESCs at their serum levels (1x) or 10-fold higher level than serum concentrations (10x), the number of HP1α signals (red) was counted using ImageJ software. The upper panel shows images of cells exposed to 1x chemicals; the number of signals is shown as a box plot in the lower panel. Statistical comparisons of signal number were performed using the Wilcoxon test. ∗ P < 0.01. Scale bar = 10 μm. (b) Effects of exposing hiPSCs to groups of chemicals on heterochromatin formation. Cells were treated with serum concentrations of combinations of chemicals belonging to groups A–E for 96 h, and the heterochromatin status was evaluated by counting the number of HP1α signals. ∗ P < 0.01. All heterochromatin analyses were performed twice independently.
Figure 4Effects of a chemical mixture (DEP, Hg, cotinine, Se, and S-421) on the epigenetic status of hiPSCs. (a) Cells were treated with serum concentrations of a chemical mixture (DEP, Hg, cotinine, Se, and S-421) for 96 h, and the number of HP1α signals (red) was counted using ImageJ software. Statistical comparisons of signal number were performed using the Wilcoxon test. ∗ P < 0.01. Scale bar = 10 μm. Heterochromatin analysis was performed twice independently. (b) The DNA methylation status of the T-DMRs of 10 gene regions obtained using COBRA assays. Human iPSCs were cultured as described in (a); the DNA methylation percentage is shown as means ± SE (n = 3). The white and black boxes indicate the methylation level of solvent-treated control and chemical-exposed cells, respectively. Statistical comparisons of DNA methylation were performed using Student's t-test. ∗ P < 0.05. (c) Impaired EB formation after exposure to the chemical mixture. Cells were treated with serum concentrations of the five chemicals for 96 h, and cells were differentiated into EBs in the presence of chemicals for 15 days. Scale bar = 250 μm. Experiments were performed thrice independently.
Figure 5Effects of the chemical mixture (DEP, Hg, cotinine, Se, and S-421) on cellular differentiation. (a) Effects of the timing of chemical exposure on EB formation. EBs derived from hiPSCs were cultured using three culture conditions: I, solvent-treated control; II and III, cells treated with the chemical mixture for 4 days before differentiation. EB formation was then induced for up to 24 days in the absence (II) or presence (III) of the chemical mixture (left panel). The right panel shows images of EBs on day 24. Scale bar = 250 μm. −: solvent only; +: exposure to serum concentrations of the chemical mixture. Experiments were performed thrice independently. (b) Effects of the five chemicals on neural differentiation. The culture conditions used were the same as in (a). Differentiated cells were analyzed on day 20 (right panel). Enlarged images are shown as “a” and “b” for conditions II and III, respectively. Scale bar = 200 μm. Experiments were performed twice independently. (c) After 24 days of neural differentiation in culture conditions I and II, cells were stained with antibodies for the neural marker βIII-tubulin, and the βIII-tubulin-positive area (%) in 150 images was measured using ImageJ software. The data are presented as means ± SE. (d) Neural marker gene expression. On day 24, cells grown in culture conditions I and II were harvested, and the expression levels of the neural marker genes NES, MAP2, and PAX6 were assessed using RT-PCR. The relative expression levels were normalized to that of GAPDH. The expression levels are shown as mean ± SD (n = 3). Statistical comparisons of the expression level were performed using Student's t-test. The P-value of NES, MAP2, and PAX6 was 0.081, 0.015, and 0.065, respectively. ∗ P < 0.05. (e) Summary of cellular differentiation in chemical-exposed hiPSCs. −: solvent only; +: exposure to serum concentrations of DEP, Hg, cotinine, Se, and S-421.
| Bisulfite PCR primers | Primers (5′ to 3′) | Size (bp) | From transcription start site |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Forward: TGGGGTTTATGAGGGTAAGGT | 214 | 1.5 kbp downstream |
| Reverse: CCACACCACACACAACCAAT | |||
|
| |||
|
| Forward: GGTTTAGGTGTTTGAAGATTTGGT | 378 | 500 bp upstream |
| Reverse: ATAAATACCCCTAATCCCCCTAAA | |||
|
| |||
|
| Forward: ATTTGGAAATAGGGAGGAGTAATTTT | 262 | 1.5 kbp upstream |
| Reverse: TCTCAACAACTTATTTTCTTACAACACA | |||
|
| |||
|
| Forward: TGTGGTTTATGTTTGGAATTG | 183 | 2.0 kbp downstream |
| Reverse: TCACTAACTCTTCACCCACAATTTA | |||
|
| |||
|
| Forward: TTTAAATTATTTTGTTTTGGGGATG | 490 | 2.5 kbp downstream |
| Reverse: TCTACCTCTCACAAACCAACTATCC | |||
|
| |||
|
| Forward: TTTTATGTGGGGTTTAGTAGTTTGG | 269 | 1.5 kbp upstream |
| Reverse: ACACATTCACACTCACAAACACATTA | |||
|
| |||
|
| Forward: TGAAAGGGAAGGGGTTGTTT | 216 | 1.5 kbp downstream |
| Reverse: TCCCTATATTATACACTATCCCAAAAA | |||
|
| |||
|
| Forward: TGGGTTTGTTATTTATTTTGTTGGTA | 357 | 1.0 kbp downstream |
| Reverse: CTACCCCACTCTTAAAACCATCTTCT | |||
|
| |||
|
| Forward: TTATGGGTTTAGGTATGGTGGAAATA | 291 | 500 bp downstream |
| Reverse: AAAACTACCCAATAACATCCACAAAC | |||
|
| |||
|
| Forward: ATAGTTTTGGGAAAGTAGAATTTGGT | 379 | 1.5 kbp upstream |
| Reverse: TATTTATCTCACCCAACTCAAAAACA | |||
| RT-PCR primers | Primers (5′ to 3′) | Size (bp) |
|---|---|---|
|
| Forward: CAGGTGGCGGACGTGTGAAAATTGAGAGTG | 212 |
| Reverse: CACGCTGGATCTGCCTGGGGACTGTG | ||
|
| ||
|
| Forward: ACCCATTATCCAGATGTGTTTGCCCGAG | 317 |
| Reverse: ATGGTGAAGCTGGGCATAGGCGGCAG | ||
|
| ||
|
| Forward: CTCCAAGACTTCCCTCAGCTTT | 163 |
| Reverse: CTTAAGAAAGGCTGGCACAGGT | ||
|
| ||
|
| Forward: CAAGATCAGCAATGCCT | 68 |
| Reverse: CTTCCACGATACCAAAGTTGTC | ||