| Literature DB >> 26624992 |
Anna Mattsson1, Anna Kärrman2, Rui Pinto3,4, Björn Brunström1.
Abstract
Untargeted metabolic profiling of body fluids in experimental animals and humans exposed to chemicals may reveal early signs of toxicity and indicate toxicity pathways. Avian embryos develop separately from their mothers, which gives unique possibilities to study effects of chemicals during embryo development with minimal confounding factors from the mother. In this study we explored blood plasma and allantoic fluid from chicken embryos as matrices for revealing metabolic changes caused by exposure to chemicals during embryonic development. Embryos were exposed via egg injection on day 7 to the environmental pollutant perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), and effects on the metabolic profile on day 12 were compared with those caused by GW7647 and rosiglitazone, which are selective agonists to peroxisome-proliferator activated receptor α (PPARα) and PPARγ, respectively. Analysis of the metabolite concentrations from allantoic fluid by Orthogonal Partial Least Squares Discriminant Analysis (OPLS-DA) showed clear separation between the embryos exposed to GW7647, rosiglitazone, and vehicle control, respectively. In blood plasma only GW7647 caused a significant effect on the metabolic profile. PFOA induced embryo mortality and increased relative liver weight at the highest dose. Sublethal doses of PFOA did not significantly affect the metabolic profile in either matrix, although single metabolites appeared to be altered. Neonatal mortality by PFOA in the mouse has been suggested to be mediated via activation of PPARα. However, we found no similarity in the metabolite profile of chicken embryos exposed to PFOA with those of embryos exposed to PPAR agonists. This indicates that PFOA does not activate PPAR pathways in our model at concentrations in eggs and embryos well above those found in wild birds. The present study suggests that allantoic fluid and plasma from chicken embryos are useful and complementary matrices for exploring effects on the metabolic profile resulting from chemical exposure during embryonic development.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26624992 PMCID: PMC4666608 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143780
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Injected doses, number of injected eggs, and number of samples of allantoic fluid and blood plasma subjected to metabolic profiling.
Chicken eggs were injected on E7 and embryos were sampled on E12.
| Group | Dose | No of eggs | Allantoic fluid | Blood plasma | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (μg/egg) | (mg/kg egg) | f | m | f | m | ||
| Control | 0 | 0 | 40 | 9 | 11 | 9 | 11 |
| GW7647 | 150 | 2.5 | 40 | 8 | 11 | 9 | 11 |
| Rosiglitazone | 150 | 2.5 | 40 | 10 | 13 | 9 | 13 |
| PFOA 50 | 50 | 0.83 | 40 | 11 | 7 | 11 | 7 |
| PFOA 250 | 250 | 4.2 | 40 | 11 | 7 | 11 | 9 |
| PFOA 1000 | 1000 | 18 | 54 | - | - | - | - |
| Ʃ | 210 | 49 | 49 | 49 | 51 | ||
Mortality rate, body weight and liver-somatic index.
Chicken embryos were treated with various compounds by in ovo injection on E7 and were sampled on E12.
| Mortality rate | Body weight (g) | Liver-somatic index (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ratio | % | Mean ± SD | N | Mean ± SD | N | |
| Control | 1/40 | 2.5 | 4.4 ± 0.3 | 24 | 1.7 ± 0.2 | 24 |
| GW7647 | 0/40 | 0 | 4.2 ± 0.6 | 22 | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 22 |
| Rosiglitazone | 2/40 | 5 | 4.3 ± 0.4 | 29 | 1.7 ± 0.2 | 27 |
| PFOA 50 | 2/40 | 5 | 4.2 ± 0.5 | 21 | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 21 |
| PFOA 250 | 1/40 | 2.5 | 4.3 ± 0.4 | 27 | 1.7 ± 0.2 | 26 |
| PFOA 1000 | 19/54 | 35 | 4.6 ± 0.4 | 5 | 2.0 ± 0.2 | 5 |
N, number of embryos; ND, not determined; SD, standard deviation; Control eggs were injected with the vehicle, DMSO.
aBody weight and liver-somatic index were only determined for five embryos from replicate experiment A in this group;
***p<0.001;
**p<0.01.
Fig 1PFOA concentration (mean + SD) in (A) liver and (B) plasma.
Chicken embryos were treated with PFOA (50, 250 or 1000 μg/egg) by in ovo injection on E7 and were sampled on E12. Liver PFOA concentration was analyzed in five individuals per group (mixed sexes), and plasma PFOA concentration was analyzed in four (50 and 250 μg PFOA/egg) or three (1000 μg PFOA/egg) individuals. Concentrations of PFOA in the control samples were similar to those in the procedural blanks.
Concentrations of lipids (mM; mean ± standard deviation) in plasma.
Chicken embryos were treated with various compounds by in ovo injection on E7 and were sampled on E12.
| N | Total C | LDL-C | HDL-C | LDL/HDL | TAG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 15 | 5.2 ± 0.6 | 1.5 ± 0.2 | 0.58 ± 0.04 | 2.6 ± 0.4 | 5.0 ± 1.0 |
| GW7647 | 15 | 5.5 ± 0.3 | 1.5 ± 0.2 | 0.63 ± 0.05 | 2.4 ± 0.4 | 4.9 ± 0.7 |
| Rosiglitazone | 17 | 5.2 ± 0.4 | 1.5 ± 0.2 | 0.60± 0.06 | 2.5 ± 0.4 | 5.4 ± 0.8 |
| PFOA 50 | 17 | 5.2 ± 0.8 | 1.5 ± 0.2 | 0.59 ± 0.06 | 2.5 ± 0.3 | 5.0 ± 0.8 |
| PFOA 250 | 16 | 5.0 ± 0.5 | 1.5 ± 0.3 | 0.57 ± 0.05 | 2.6 ± 0.5 | 5.0 ± 0.7 |
*P<0.05;
N, number of samples;
aTotal cholesterol;
bLow-density lipoprotein cholesterol;
cHigh-density lipoprotein cholesterol;
d Triacylglycerols
Fig 2OPLS-DA score scatter plots of metabolites in (A) allantoic fluid and (B) plasma.
Statistics of OPLS-DA models of metabolic profiles in chicken embryos treated with various compounds by in ovo injection on E7 and sampled on E12.
| Classes | Matrix | A | N | R2X | R2Y | Q2 | CV ANOVA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All treatments | AF | 2 + 2 | 98 | 0.26 | 0.45 | 0.29 |
|
| All treatments | Plasma | 1 + 1 | 100 | 0.13 | 0.21 | 0.13 |
|
| C vs GW7647 | AF | 1 + 1 | 39 | 0.17 | 0.96 | 0.72 |
|
| C vs GW7647 | Plasma | 1 + 1 | 40 | 0.16 | 0.93 | 0.64 |
|
| C vs rosiglitazone | AF | 1 + 1 | 43 | 0.19 | 0.92 | 0.66 |
|
| C vs rosiglitazone | Plasma | 0 + 0 | 42 | - | - | - | ns |
| C vs PFOA-50 | AF | 0 + 0 | 38 | - | - | - | ns |
| C vs PFOA-50 | Plasma | 0 + 0 | 38 | - | - | - | ns |
| C vs PFOA-250 | AF | 0 + 0 | 38 | - | - | - | ns |
| C vs PFOA-250 | Plasma | 0 + 0 | 40 | - | - | - | ns |
| Females vs males | AF | 1+2 | 98 | 0.18 | 0.90 | 0.40 |
|
| Females vs males | Plasma | 1+2 | 100 | 0.17 | 0.89 | 0.37 |
|
AF, Allantoic fluid; A, Number of predictive + orthogonal latent variables; N, Number of samples;
***p<0.0001 in Cross Validation ANOVA; C, control.
Fig 3SUS-plots (Shared and Unique Structures) of GW7647 vs rosiglitazone OPLS-DA models.
In the SUS-plot, the correlation from the predictive component of each of the two compared models is plotted against each other. The x-axis indicates change in concentration caused by GW7647 and the y-axis indicates change caused by rosiglitazone (upregulation at positive values and downregulation at negative values, compared to control). Thus, metabolites close to the diagonal running from the lower left corner to the upper right corner are affected by both GW7647 and rosiglitazone in a similar way, i.e. variables at the extremes of this diagonal are upregulated (top right) or downregulated (lower left) by both compounds. The plots show that many metabolites are affected in the same direction by the two compounds but there are also metabolites that are affected by only one of the compounds or affected in the opposite direction by the two compounds.
Fig 4OPLS-DA score scatter plots of sex differences in the metabolic profile in (A) allantoic fluid and (B) plasma.
Chicken embryos were treated by in ovo injection on E7 and were sampled on E12. Embryos from all studied treatment groups were assigned to two different classes based on their sex. The ellipse shows a Hotelling's T2 95% confidence area. Axes show score vectors (t) of predictive latent variable 1 and orthogonal latent variable 1. Model statistics are shown in Table 4.