Mele N Avilla, Kristen M C Malecki, Mark E Hahn1, Rachel H Wilson, Christopher A Bradfield2. 1. Biology Department, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543-1050, United States. 2. McArdle Laboratory for Cancer Research, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin 53705-227, United States.
Abstract
The Ah receptor (AHR) has been studied for almost five decades. Yet, we still have many important questions about its role in normal physiology and development. Moreover, we still do not fully understand how this protein mediates the adverse effects of a variety of environmental pollutants, such as the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), the chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins ("dioxins"), and many polyhalogenated biphenyls. To provide a platform for future research, we provide the historical underpinnings of our current state of knowledge about AHR signal transduction, identify a few areas of needed research, and then develop concepts such as adaptive metabolism, ligand structural diversity, and the importance of proligands in receptor activation. We finish with a discussion of the cognate physiological role of the AHR, our perspective on why this receptor is so highly conserved, and how we might think about its cognate ligands in the future.
The Ah receptor (AHR) has been studied for almost five decades. Yet, we still have many important questions about its role in normal physiology and development. Moreover, we still do not fully understand how this protein mediates the adverse effects of a variety of environmental pollutants, such as the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), the chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins ("dioxins"), and many polyhalogenated biphenyls. To provide a platform for future research, we provide the historical underpinnings of our current state of knowledge about AHR signal transduction, identify a few areas of needed research, and then develop concepts such as adaptive metabolism, ligand structural diversity, and the importance of proligands in receptor activation. We finish with a discussion of the cognate physiological role of the AHR, our perspective on why this receptor is so highly conserved, and how we might think about its cognate ligands in the future.
The role of the Ah
receptor (AHR) in human health and environmental
toxicology continues to be an area of considerable interest. In this
review, we provide a brief history of AHR research, our interpretation
of recent discoveries, and our vision for the research path forward.
Owing to the thousands of publications on this topic, we have attempted
to provide our own perspective on the history of AHR discovery, current
state of knowledge, and opportunities for further inquiry, rather
than perform a comprehensive review. This approach was taken in an
effort to provide a foundation for future research and present ideas
designed to stimulate new scientific directions. In an effort toward
clarity, we try to emphasize reviews and examples and have not attempted
to generate an exhaustive review of the primary literature. Our rationale
was that these citations will represent the complicated literature,
alternative interpretations of the relevant science, and can serve
as primary citations when further reading is of interest.
The Ah Receptor
Historical
Foundations
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Discovery
of the Ah Locus
Early indications for the
existence of
the AHR arose from studies designed to understand the metabolism of
carcinogenicpolycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), such as benzo[a]pyrene (BAP), 7,12-dimethylbenzanthracene (DMBA), and
3-methylcholanthrene (3MC) (Figure ).[1,2] Compounds like these arise from
combustion processes and are common contaminants in chimney soot,
charbroiled foods, diesel exhaust, outdoor burns, cigarette smoke,
and coal tar.[3−8]
Figure 1
Investigations
of carcinogenic PAHs led to discovery of the Ah locus.
Studies using BAP, DMBA, and 3-MC provided early
evidence for the existence of the AHR (see text for references).
Investigations
of carcinogenic PAHs led to discovery of the Ah locus.
Studies using BAP, DMBA, and 3-MC provided early
evidence for the existence of the AHR (see text for references).In early carcinogen metabolism studies, the prominent
enzymatic
activity that oxidized PAHs to hydroxylated metabolites became known
as “aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylase” or simply “AHH.” From
this work, three important observations arose.[9,10] First,
AHH activity was the product of multiple cytochrome P450-dependent
monooxygenases (P450s).[11] Second, AHH activity
was significantly upregulated, or “induced”, by prior
exposure to a broad spectrum of these same PAHs.[12] Third, in mice, a single autosomal locus harbors significant
control over induction sensitivity across inbred strains (i.e., some
strains were more inducible than others).[13] The locus became commonly known as Ah for its role
in regulating AHH activity and was formally renamed the “aryl hydrocarbon receptor” or Ahr locus in later years.[14,15] In addition to its importance as an early example of carcinogen
metabolism regulation, the AHH system also became a widely studied
model of mammalian enzyme induction and adaptive metabolism (i.e.,
exposure to a xenobiotic substrate inducing its metabolism).[16,17]
Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Discovery of the Ah Receptor
(AHR)
Additional evidence for the existence of an AHR arose
from experiments designed to understand the mechanism of action of
chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and related environmental
pollutants.[18] Chlorinated dioxins and the
related chlorinated dibenzofurans have never seen commercial use but
are commonly introduced into the environment as trace contaminants
of many industrial processes, anthropogenic sources, and some natural
processes (Figure and Table ). The
structurally related coplanar polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and
coplanar polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs) have seen commercial production
and are often introduced into the environment as the result of industrial
accident or improper disposal. As a class, these compounds display
similar environmental fates, are environmentally persistent, are lipophilic,
bioaccumulate in the food chain, and they elicit similar biological
responses dependent upon chlorination pattern.[19−21]
Figure 2
Further elucidation of
the Ah locus arose from toxicity studies
using the toxicant TCDD. TCDD, 2,3,7,8-TCDF (tetrachlorodibenzofuran),
and PCB 77 (polychlorinated biphenyl) induce the same P450s and related
enzymes as did BAP, DMBA, and 3-MC. TCDD has higher affinity for AHR
and thus has greater potency, making TCDD a model inducer of AHR signaling
(see text for details).
Table 1
Well-Known Accidents/Exposures to
Dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds
location
contamination
source
route of exposure
human health implications
example reference
Belgium
transformer oil in fat of
animal feed
poultry,
pork, beef, milk,
eggs, and various fat-containing food items
50 kg of PCBs and 1 g of “dioxin” were contaminated in 500 tons of animal feed and distributed to farms in Belgium and on some nearby countries. 20–30% of these contaminants were
estimated to have been consumed by the Belgian population.
[[272]]
Ireland
fuel from drying system
used during animal feed production
cattle, pork meat, and pork
products
Significant
health concerns
by public. Well-documented case of source and movement of dioxin and
related compounds through commerce.
[[273, 274]]
Seveso, Italy
chemical factory accident:
uncontrolled exothermic reaction during the manufacturing of trichlorophenol
air and soil
Immediate effects from cloud
deposition: nausea, headache, skin lesions, and eye irritation. Long-term
effects: Chloracne, increased incidence of diabetes, cancer, and mortality
from cardiovascular and respiratory disease.
air,
soil, surrounding waters,
and ingestion (legacy through hand-to-mouth contact)
Found association between
dioxin exposure and soft tissue sarcoma, non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma,
chronic lymphocytic leukemia, Hodgkin’s lymphoma, chloracne,
hypertension, and monoclonal gammopathy. Movement of dioxins into
the human food chain and human tissues and biological fluids decades
after use.
[[277, 278]]
Times
Beach, Missouri
waste
oil used for dust
control
air and soil
Greater than 100 ppb in
community. Human, wildlife, and livestock toxicity reported.
[[279, 280]]
Further elucidation of
the Ah locus arose from toxicity studies
using the toxicant TCDD. TCDD, 2,3,7,8-TCDF (tetrachlorodibenzofuran),
and PCB 77 (polychlorinated biphenyl) induce the same P450s and related
enzymes as did BAP, DMBA, and 3-MC. TCDD has higher affinity for AHR
and thus has greater potency, making TCDD a model inducer of AHR signaling
(see text for details).The dioxin,
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
(TCDD), is widely considered as the prototype for this class of environmental
pollutant. Exposure to TCDD can lead to a broad spectrum of species-specific
toxic effects, often referred to as the “dioxin toxic syndrome.”
This syndrome commonly includes epithelial hyperplasia/metaplasia,
chloracne, porphyria, late-stage terata, lymphoid involution, intestinal
damage, hepatocellular damage, and cancer.[18,22] Dioxins like TCDD are remarkably potent toxicants, with a median
lethal dose (LD50) that can be in the low μg/kg range
in some animal models.[23,24] While dioxin toxicology has its
research origins from an agricultural accident in poultry in the late
1950s,[25] subsequent human exposures resulting
from numerous pollution sources and environmental accidents, as well
as its presence in the Vietnam War defoliant known as “Agent
Orange”, sparked a modern effort to understand its mechanism
of toxic action (Table ).[26,27,2829] Despite the popular, regulatory, and scientific concern
that has
been in place for decades, halogenated dioxins, dibenzofurans, and
biphenyls can still be found in human blood samples and in ecosystems
around the globe.[19,30−33]It was through investigations
into the toxic action of TCDD that
we learned that the Ahr locus encodes a receptor.
This conclusion arose from four observations.[18,34−36] First, TCDD induced the same P450s and related enzymes
as did BAP, DMBA, and 3MC but with much greater potency.[37] Second, radiolabeled dioxin analogues bound
to a high affinity, low-capacity soluble protein site, designated
as a receptor in target tissues.[35] Third,
binding affinity for this “receptor” site segregated
with the high and low responsiveness (inducibility) phenotype observed
across the C57BL/6 (“responsive”) and DBA/2 (“nonresponsive”)
mouse strains.[35,38] Fourth, the rank order potency
for a given ligand’s potency to induce AHH activity (or many
aspects of toxicity) corresponds to its rank order potency for receptor
binding affinity. In sum, the early investigations into the genetics
of PAH metabolism and the mechanism of dioxin’s toxic mechanism
converged to reveal a soluble receptor known as the AHR, encoded by
the Ahr locus, and proved that this receptor mediates
many of the biological effects of these environmentally important
pollutants.
Biochemical and Molecular Characterization
of the Ah Receptor
(AHR)
Early Molecular and Biochemical Insights
A better understanding
of AHR signal transduction arose from a long history of pharmacologic
and molecular studies of the regulatory elements of the genes encoding
the induced enzymes that comprised AHH activity.[34,39−41] Although a bit more complex, we now know that AHH
and PAH metabolism can be considered the composite activity of multiple
genetic loci, including, Cyp1a1, Cyp1a2, and Cyp1b1. Each of the Cyp1 gene products encodes
a member of the cytochrome P450-dependent monooxygenase family with
metabolic activity toward PAH substrates.[9,11,42−46]The genomic elements controlling the ligand-activated AHR-dependent
induction were given multiple names over the years, including xenobiotic
responsive elements (XREs), dioxin responsive elements (DREs), and
AHR responsive elements (AHREs, which we will use here).[41,42,47] The discovery and characterization
of these genomic enhancers were initially based mostly on studies
of Cyp1a1 regulation. Of particular importance were
the observations that the enhancers controlling AHR-mediated upregulation
of Cyp1 genes commonly harbored consensus sequences
of 5′-T/GNGCGTGA/C-3′. For Cyp1a1 and
many other inducible genes, these elements often existed in multiple
copies proximal and 5′ to the transcriptional start site of
the target promoter.[45,48−50]
Ah Receptor
Nuclear Translocator
A significant step
in developing a basic model of AHR signal transduction came from the
molecular cloning of the AHR and its dimerization partner, the Ah Receptor Nuclear Translocator (ARNT).[51−53] These cloning
experiments revealed that both the AHR and ARNT were structurally
related, heterodimeric partners, harboring both basic helix–loop–helix
(bHLH) and PER-ARNT-SIM (PAS) homology domains within their N-terminal
halves[54,55] (Figure ). The bHLH domain occurs in metazoan transcriptional
regulators and commonly provides both a dimerization surface and an
α-helix that interacts with specific sequences in the major
and minor grooves of DNA.[54,56−60] The PAS homology domain was named based on the similarity between
amino acid sequences within ARNT and the products of two regulatory
loci found in Drosophila melanogaster, PER and SIM
(products of the per and sim loci,
respectively).[54] In addition to these two
fruit fly gene products, PAS domains occur in a number of important
mammalian regulatory proteins, including the “hypoxia-inducible
factors” (HIFs) important in physiological adaptation to low
oxygen and “clock” proteins central to the maintenance
of circadian rhythms.[61] Importantly, PAS
domains have evolutionary roots in prokaryotic and plant systems,
where parallel domains also play a role in environmental adaptation
to stimuli such as light and oxygen[62]
Figure 3
Mapping
of AHR and ARNT functional domains and founding bHLH-PAS
family members. The bHLH domain and N-terminus provide recognition
of target DNA enhancers. The PAS domains control dimerization strength
and selectivity, receptor repression, chaperone interactions, and
ligand binding. Approximation of those domains for AHR are depicted
as lines above. The C-terminus provides possible docking sites for
coactivators.[54−61,64,65,67−70,72,74,75,77,79,80,91,131,281−283] Also see text for further details.
Mapping
of AHR and ARNT functional domains and founding bHLH-PAS
family members. The bHLH domain and N-terminus provide recognition
of target DNA enhancers. The PAS domains control dimerization strength
and selectivity, receptor repression, chaperone interactions, and
ligand binding. Approximation of those domains for AHR are depicted
as lines above. The C-terminus provides possible docking sites for
coactivators.[54−61,64,65,67−70,72,74,75,77,79,80,91,131,281−283] Also see text for further details.
Functional Domain Maps
The importance of the bHLH-PAS
region in dimerization and DNA binding is provided by numerous functional
mapping studies in both the AHR and ARNT.[60,63−65] Like many bHLH proteins, the AHR and ARNT employ
this domain as a dimerization surface and use the basic N-terminal
helix to provide recognition of target DNA enhancers, with each basic
region laying within a “half-site” of the AHRE (e.g.,
TNGC or GTG).[57−59,61,66−68] The functional role of the PAS domain can be thought
of in the context of its two degenerate repeats or subdomains, referred
to as PAS-A and PAS-B. The PAS-A domain plays a significant role in
supporting the dimerization that drives DNA binding selectivity. In
contrast, the PAS-B domain is important in dimerization but also harbors
domains for receptor stabilization, receptor repression, chaperone
interactions, and ligand binding.[61,63,69−73]Although the C-terminal halves of the AHR and ARNT are highly
divergent at the sequence level, this region appears to harbor domains
of similar function in the two proteins. Studies employing fusions
of this region with heterologous DNA binding domains reveal that potent
transcriptional activation domains (TADs) reside within the C-terminal
halves of these proteins, overlapping with glutamine-rich or highly
acidic and disordered regions.[74−78] In more recent years, additional docking domains for some coactivators
map to the bHLH-PAS domains of both the AHR and ARNT[79] (Table ). While our understanding of coactivator associations is still nascent,
the AHR–ARNT-dimer-mediated transcription of target genes such
as Cyp1a1 appears to involve, at least in part, classical
chromatin modifications and recruitment of members of the transcription
initiation complex.[79,80]
Table 2
Examples
of Some Coactivators That
Have Been Shown to Associate with AHR or Its Complexa
coactivator
reference
notes
BRCA-1
[[284, 285]]
interaction with both AHR
and ARNT
BRG-1
[[286, 287]]
interaction with AHR, enhances
complex activity
CARM-1
[[288]]
interaction with AHR
CoCoA
[[289]]
interaction with both AHR
and ARNT
COUP-TF1
[[290]]
interaction with
AHR and
not ARNT
ERα
[[290]]
interaction with AHR and
not ARNT
ERRα
[[290]]
interaction with AHR and
not ARNT
ERAP140
[[291]]
interaction with AHR–ARNT
complex
GAC63 (GRIP1)
[[292]]
interaction with AHR
Mediator
[[97]]
interaction with
AHR–ARNT
complex
P160 (NcoA-1-3)
[[117]]
interaction
with both AHR
and ARNT
NcoA-4
[[93]]
interaction with both AHR
and ARNT
P300
[[117, 293, 294]]
interaction with both AHR
and ARNT
PGC-1
[[288]]
interaction with AHR
RB
[[295]]
interaction with
AHR
RIP140
[[296, 297]]
interaction with
AHR, cross
talk with ERα
SHP
[[298]]
interaction with ARNT and
not AHR
SMRT
[[291, 299]]
interaction with
AHR–ARNT
complex and AHR
SRC1 (NcoA-1)
[[283, 288]]
interaction with
AHR Q-rich
region
SRC2 (NcoA-2)
[[288]]
interaction with
AHR
SRC3 (NcoA-3)
[[288]]
interaction with
AHR
TAF4
[[283]]
interaction with AHR Q-rich
region
TAF6
[[283]]
interaction with AHR Q-rich
region
TBP
[[283]]
interaction with AHR Q-rich
region
TIF2
[[283]]
interaction with AHR Q-rich
region
TRAP220
[[288]]
interaction with AHR
TRIP230
[[300]]
interaction with
ARNT
SIN3A
[[301]]
enhances complex activity
This table of
examples was generated
by a cross reference of the topics, “Ah receptor” and
“Coactivator” in the “Web of Science”
search engine of scientific publications, apps.webofknowledge.com (8/1/2019). It was then supplemented with information found in two
reports on the topic.[79,117] Clear, alternative names of
coactivators are given in parentheses. The table is meant to represent
the diversity of known AHR–coactivator interactions and is
not intended to be an exhaustive list.
This table of
examples was generated
by a cross reference of the topics, “Ah receptor” and
“Coactivator” in the “Web of Science”
search engine of scientific publications, apps.webofknowledge.com (8/1/2019). It was then supplemented with information found in two
reports on the topic.[79,117] Clear, alternative names of
coactivators are given in parentheses. The table is meant to represent
the diversity of known AHR–coactivator interactions and is
not intended to be an exhaustive list.
Adaptive Metabolism Pathway
Model for
Adaptive Metabolism
As the result of the
first 50 years of investigation into the AHR, we have a working model
of the functional domains and signaling steps that regulate the expression
of the xenobiotic-metabolizing enzymes such as CYP1A1 (Figure ).[12,36,47,48,58,73,81] Through the use of molecular reagents from cloned AHR and ARNT,
mutant hepatoma cell lines, immunochemical tools for localization
and precipitation, and high-affinity radioligands, the importance
of subcellular localization, chaperones, and the ordering of signaling
steps for upregulation of genes is becoming clearer.[34,36] The most common description of AHR signaling as it relates to CYP1A1 gene induction is as follows: In the absence of an
inducing ligand, the AHR protein resides predominantly in the cell’s
cytoplasm in a complex with a number of chaperones, including a dimer
of the 90 kDa heat shock protein (Hsp90) and smaller chaperones known
as the AHR interacting protein (AIP, also known as ARA9 or XAP2) and
the P23 protein.[82−89] Upon the binding of ligand to the AHR, a conformational change in
the receptor leads to a reorganization of chaperones and allows presentation
of the NLS in the AHR’s N-terminus. Translocation of the AHR
to the nuclear compartment then allows dimerization with its nuclear
partner, ARNT.[58,84,87] The AHR–ARNT dimer produces a competent DNA binding dimer
with specificity for AHREs within chromatin and activation of nearby
target promoters such as that for Cyp1a1. While much
is still to be learned about this final transcriptional step, the
AHR–ARNT dimer has been shown to increase promoter accessibility
and alter chromatin structure through association with numerous known
coactivators[90−98] (see examples in Table ).
Figure 4
Classic AHR signaling pathway. Prior to ligand binding, AHR remains
in cytosol bound to HSP90, P23, and ARA9. When a ligand binds, a conformational
change occurs, exposing the nuclear localization sequence (NLS) in
AHR’s N-terminus. Presentation of NLS permits the translocation
of AHR to the nucleus and subsequent dimerization with ARNT. The AHR–ARNT
heterodimer recognizes and binds to AHREs in the genome and initiates
transcription of select genes. This interaction can be inhibited by
AHRR, CYP1 metabolism of ligands, and post-translational modification
of the receptor.[12,34,36,47,48,58,73,81−89,91−93,96,97,291,294,297,302]
Classic AHR signaling pathway. Prior to ligand binding, AHR remains
in cytosol bound to HSP90, P23, and ARA9. When a ligand binds, a conformational
change occurs, exposing the nuclear localization sequence (NLS) in
AHR’s N-terminus. Presentation of NLS permits the translocation
of AHR to the nucleus and subsequent dimerization with ARNT. The AHR–ARNT
heterodimer recognizes and binds to AHREs in the genome and initiates
transcription of select genes. This interaction can be inhibited by
AHRR, CYP1 metabolism of ligands, and post-translational modification
of the receptor.[12,34,36,47,48,58,73,81−89,91−93,96,97,291,294,297,302]
Pathway Feedback Inhibition
One intriguing observation
about AHR signal transduction is that several mechanisms exist to
downregulate this signaling. Primary evidence for the importance of
feedback inhibition comes from one of the more recently discovered
targets of the ligand-activated AHR–ARNT complex, an additional
bHLH-PAS protein known as the Ah receptor repressor (AHRR).[99,100] The AHRR not only dimerizes with ARNT and competes for AHRE occupancy
but also inhibits AHRE-mediated transcription by influencing the chromatin
structure around the promoters of CYP1A1 and presumably
related AHRE-driven genes.[101,102] In addition to this
upregulated repressor activity, the AHR also appears to be the target
of multiple additional downregulators.[103] Not only has the ligand-activated AHR been shown to be constitutively
degraded by ubiquitination and proteasomal degradation,[104−106] one of its AHRE-driven target genes, Tiparp, may
ADP-ribosylate the AHR, reducing its activity and half-life.[107,108]The existence of AHRE regulated genes such as AHRR and TIPARP
provides support for an additional perspective on AHR signaling. While
we classically think of this system as a pathway to adapt to PAH molecules
generated exogenously or endogenously, it is also interesting to think
of the CYP1A1/CYP1A2/CYP1B1 gene targets as additional
participants in a negative feedback loop. That is, activation of the
AHR by PAHs (and other ligands described below) leads to the upregulation
of CYP1 monooxygenases and their consequent metabolic degradation
and excretion of inducing ligands. This would appear to represent
a classic substrate inducing its own metabolism in a feedback loop.[12,47,48] These observations lead to the
question: why is so much biology directed toward AHR downregulation
and attenuation of signaling? Possible answers are that the AHR is
part of a biological response that must be rapidly attenuated to avoid
pathological consequences or that it is part of a chronic response
that must be precisely modulated over time (see below).
More to Be
Learned about Functional Domains and Signaling
It is important
to note that this current description of the AHR
domain map and signal transduction is almost certainly an oversimplification,
with issues such as the importance of receptor phosphorylation and
the events dictating receptor transformation still unclear.[109−112] Similarly, while we have learned a great deal about the bHLH domain,
much is still to be learned about the N-terminal half of the AHR.
While the bHLH tail is thought to harbor both DNA recognition and
nuclear localization sequences (NLS), this region also appears to
play additional roles in receptor signaling. In one example of this
idea, this same region harbors a nuclear export sequence (NES), which
influences receptor subcellular localization, and also a motif for
cellular chaperone interaction, which can influence receptor concentration
and transformation.[72,113−115] Finally, our understanding of how this domain interacts with the
genome is probably also incomplete. This conclusion is supported by
the identification of noncanonical enhancer target sites that are
in addition to classical AHREs as defined above.[116]Similarly, our understanding of the C-terminal halves
of these proteins and the transactivation events they mediate is also
limited, with the role of specific coactivators in distinct cellular
responses still to be determined and the importance of this domain
in receptor transformation still unclear. An improved understanding
of the multiple coactivator interactions and insights into their combinatorial
and dynamic nature will be important if we are to explain the wide
variety of cell-, species-, and ligand-specific responses induced
by AHR agonists and antagonists.[91,96,116,107,118] In this regard, many of the species-, tissue-, and ligand-dependent
effects of AHR agonists may be due to unique consequences of specific
coactivator recruitment within a given cellular environment (in addition
to differences in ligand-binding affinity/specificity). Moreover,
ligand-dependent recruitment of specific coactivators could underlie
the unique pharmacology of distinct agonist classes.
Dioxin-Like
Compound Concept
An early observation that
has greatly influenced our thinking is that while most AHR agonists
can achieve similar efficacy with respect to upregulation of AHH activity
(i.e., CYP1A1, CYP1A2, and/or CYP1B1), only the most potent and metabolically
recalcitrant (i.e., long T1/2) ligands
induce the “dioxin toxic syndrome.” Weaker agonists,
such as the PAHs and variety of natural ligands, which are rapidly
metabolized and have lower potency, appear to upregulate the CYP 1s
but do not induce chloracne and so on. The model proposed to explain
this phenomena is that there is a “restricted pleiotropic response”,
in addition to the upregulation of genes such as CYP1A1, which is induced by longer-lived, pharmacologically unique agonists,
and this response is required for the dioxin toxic syndrome.[18] In fact, certain end points like CYP1A1 induction
(i.e., adaptive metabolism) can occur in response to a broad spectrum
of ligands, whereas end points of the dioxin toxic syndrome appear
to require receptor activation by compounds with “dioxin-like”
pharmacological properties. As a heuristic, chlorinated dioxins, dibenzofurans,
and biphenyls with halogens in lateral positions show the greatest
potential to induce the dioxin toxic syndrome and are therefore often
designated as “dioxin-like compounds” (DLCs) (Figure ).[20]
Figure 5
Dioxin-like compound concept and approach to measuring human exposure
to mixtures. Toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) are weighted measures
that reflect the relative potencies of pollutants of concern as compared
to TCDD. Toxic equivalents (TEQs) are reported values used for risk
characterization and management (see text for details). Left: Structures
of the three classes of chlorinated DLCs. Right: Examples of three
formally designated DLCs. To calculate TEQ, the mass of each chemical
in a mixture is multiplied by its TEF and summed.[23,119,120122,124,209,303,305]
Dioxin-like compound concept and approach to measuring human exposure
to mixtures. Toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) are weighted measures
that reflect the relative potencies of pollutants of concern as compared
to TCDD. Toxic equivalents (TEQs) are reported values used for risk
characterization and management (see text for details). Left: Structures
of the three classes of chlorinated DLCs. Right: Examples of three
formally designated DLCs. To calculate TEQ, the mass of each chemical
in a mixture is multiplied by its TEF and summed.[23,119,120122,124,209,303,305]The idea that DLCs elicit effects
that are distinct from other
classes of receptor ligands (like the PAHs) has regulatory implications.
Agencies such as the World Health Organization (WHO) that direct global
health efforts and agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) that govern chemical releases within the United States employ
the principle that compounds of environmental concern that are structurally
and pharmacologically related to TCDD and that elicit toxicity through
a common mechanism are formally designated as DLCs, and their exposures
and release are regulated concordantly.[20] The principle used is that these compounds are assessed for their
relative effect potencies (REP) from dose–response assessments
for a pathological end point associated with AHR activation and toxicity.
This information is used to generate toxic equivalency factors (TEFs),
which are weighted measures that reflect the relative potencies of
a pollutant of concern as compared to TCDD (Figure ).[23,119−124] Currently, TEFs are applied to 29 compounds of environmental concern,
7 polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, 10 polychlorinated
dibenzofurans, and 12 polychlorinated biphenyls. The advantage of
this approach is that it provides a measure of toxicity from complex
mixtures of chlorinated dioxins, dibenzofurans, and biphenyls, which
are common in human exposure scenarios.
Insights from Naturally
Occurring Structural Diversity in the
Ah Receptor
Genetic Variation/Polymorphism
Early
evidence indicates
that the AHR was functionally and structurally variable both within
and across species. Support for this idea arose from the observation
that murineAhr polymorphisms lead to differential
induction of P450s across strains.[35,42] Further, examination
of additional animal species, including hamster, guinea pig, rat,
dog, and human, revealed significant differences in sensitivity and
response to dioxins.[22,125,126] This idea of receptor diversity gained further support with the
development of antibodies and photoaffinity radioligands that revealed
biochemical differences in AHR both across and within model species.[127−130] The molecular cloning of the AHR cDNAs from multiple animal species
revealed important codon polymorphisms in the Ahr gene that, when paired with radioligand-binding experiments and
immunochemistry, led to the identification of codons that influence
receptor size and ligand-binding affinity (see below).[52,53,131,132]
Molecular Insights from the Structural Gene
The AHR
structural gene, Ahr, resides on mouse chromosome
12 or on a highly syntenic region on human chromosome 7.[133−136] Comparison of the structural genes and cDNAs from mouse and human
indicates that the open reading frame is encoded by 11 exons with
highly conserved intron–exon boundaries across species. A comparison
of these genes reveals that alternate termination codons for the open
reading frame in exon 11 explain much of the receptor size differences
observed within and across species. This molecular information indicates
that the receptor open reading frame extends further in some species
(e.g., human and rat) and much less in others (e.g., the C57BL/6J
mouse). This leaves some proteins with longer C-termini than others
and explains how the AHR can be as small as 97 kDa in the C57 mouse
and as large as 105 kDa in the human or 124 kDa in the hamster.[128,130,132,135,137]
Molecular Insights from
the Mouse Model
The mouse is
an important animal model for the study of the AHR and its signaling
pathways. The initial mouse “responsiveness” polymorphism
was explained through the comparison of the AHR cDNAs derived from
responsive (Ahr allele)
and the less responsive strains (Ahr allele). These experiments revealed that there were
numerous polymorphisms between the Ahr and Ahr alleles.[138−140] Among these is a polymorphism in the stop
codon, resulting in an additional 43 amino acids in the carboxyl terminus
of the AHRd receptor as compared to the AHRb1 (identical to the cause of the cross-species differences described
above). Interestingly, two additional responsive alleles were characterized
(named Ahr and Ahr),[141] one of which (Ahr) closely resembles the Ahr allele in all but three amino acids and includes an identical
elongated c-terminal tail. Using ligand binding of expressed polymorphic
proteins, it was concluded that a primary driver of the ligand-binding
affinity was residue 375, where an alanine (A) confers higher affinity
ligand binding and greater responsiveness in mice harboring the b1,
b2, and b3 alleles. In contrast, in Ahrmice, a valine (V) at this position confers lower
affinity binding and decreased responsiveness.[139,140] Through investigations into other residues, it was also observed
that the elongated C-terminal tail found in Ahr and Ahrmice may reduce ligand binding slightly as compared to Ahr.[140] It remains unclear the extent the C-terminal half plays in ligand
binding, as this region also alters receptor stability and thus perhaps
cellular concentration.Predictions of AHR structure have been
modeled using receptor homology data from other PAS family proteins,
such as HIF-2α. These analyses support the importance of residue
375 in ligand binding as well as the influence of alanine and valine
at this position.[69,142−145] That is, the valine at 375 encoded by the Ahr allele is bulkier and hypothesized to have
repulsive properties toward the ligand while also altering the adjacent
hydrogen bond network. Interestingly, the human harbors a valine residue
at this position, and this may be better modeled by “humanized”
or the AHRd models.[146]
Molecular
Insights from the Rat Model
The rat has also
served as a powerful early model of AHR biology. This utility arose
from the classical use of this model as a tool in toxicology, its
sensitivity to TCDD induced carcinogenicity,[147] and the existence of an informative polymorphism in the receptor
that influences a strain’s responsiveness to agonist.[125] Similar to the mouse, some rat strains are
resistant (Han–Wistar, HW, 98 kDa), while others are sensitive
(e.g., Long–Evans, LE, or Sprague–Dawley, SD, 106 kDa)
to the toxic and inductive effects of ligands like TCDD. Through molecular
analysis of the cDNAs and structural genes of these AHR open reading
frames, it is now known that the explanation for reduced signaling
by the HW receptor is due to a variation at the splice junction at
exon–intron 10. While multiple consequences of this altered
splice junction can occur, this polymorphism commonly leads to a truncation
of the C-terminal end of the HW-AHR, yielding as many as two novel
protein products possible.[148] Physicochemical
studies indicate that this truncation reduces receptor concentration,
possibly due to influences on receptor stability or the potency of
the nearby transcriptionally active domains.[148,149] This naturally occurring receptor polymorphism in the rat provides
considerable evidence for the role of the receptor’s C-terminus
in AHR signaling and dioxintoxicity. An additional note is the observation
that while HW rats are resistant to many of the acute toxic effects
of high-dose dioxin exposure, they display similar dose–response
curve for end points such as CYP1A1 induction. Such a result would
seem to be an indication that classes of AHR-mediated biological/toxicological
responses exist, some of which require less receptor activation than
others.[150,151] Such an observation is in keeping with the
restricted pleiotropic model described above.[18]
What Is the Normal Physiological Role of the Ah Receptor?
While the toxicology of PAHs and dioxins led to the discovery of
the AHR as well as the discovery of the AHR’s roles in regulating
xenobiotic metabolism, many significant questions remain regarding
the role of this receptor in normal physiology. Perhaps one of the
most important questions is why this receptor exists in such a wide
range of animal species and in such a broad array of tissues and cell
types? Early research focused on the concept that the receptor was
part of a system that evolved to allow metabolic adaptation to xenobiotics,
especially PAHs, which have existed on the earth for millennia due
to natural processes such as fires and volcanic activity.[152] Parallel thinking suggests that the AHR evolved
as an allelopathic defense system, similar to those systems reducing
exposures to lipophilic natural products that display toxicity when
levels rise in an organism.[153,154] While these ideas
are all probably correct in some form, it is also probable that this
is not the only physiological role of the AHR nor are they the primary
reason for its evolutionary conservation (see below).
Lessons from
Tissue and Cellular Expression
One common
approach used to deduce the physiological role of a gene product is
to determine where and when the protein is expressed in an organism.
This method relies on the premise that tissue-specific or developmental
expression will highlight the relevant biological system. This approach
has been used to understand AHR biology and includes studies based
upon ligand binding, antibodies, and RNA analysis to report receptor
expression at the organ and tissue level.[128,131,155−157] These early studies are now complemented by high-throughput gene
expression resources such as BioGPS, ENCODE, and The Human Protein
Atlas.[158−160]While the interpretation of the collective
data from the above sources is complex, a few important observations
are noteworthy. At the organ level, the AHR is expressed at many sites,
with the placenta expressing the highest levels of the AHR mRNA in
the human.[131] The human lung is also a
highly expressing tissue in almost all reported studies and databases,
with levels in liver and bladder/urinary tract also reproducibly high.
In contrast to humans, in the mouse and rat, the lung is typically
the highest expressing organ and the placenta is much lower. While
issues such as gestation day may play a role in this reported cross-species
difference, it is notable that the human placenta is physiologically
distinct from rodent placentas.[161] We draw
two conclusions from these observations. The first is that the AHR
is most highly expressed at tissues that represent important oxygen
interfaces (lung and placenta). The second is that if the AHR is important
in human placental biology, current animal models may significantly
misrepresent this important physiology.Predictions about endogenous
function based on higher resolution
and temporal expression data (i.e., immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization techniques) are difficult to simplify,
because these studies describe AHR expression in a remarkable array
of cellular compartments and developmental times. For example, in
the E13.5 day embryo, the AHR is highly expressed in the primitive
pituitary, nasal septal cartilage, dorsal surface of the tongue, developing
thymus lung parenchyma, liver, mucosa of the developing gut, urogenital
sinus, and genital tubercle.[162] A parallel
analysis of the CNS indicates that AHR and ARNT are coexpressed in
regions of the hypothalamus and brainstem associated with appetite
and circadian regulation, and it is also highly expressed in cardiac
and skeletal muscle and epithelial regions associated with epithelial
to mesenchymal transitions.[163−165] Adding to this diversity, are
reports of AHR expression in rabbit morula and blastocysts, humanpancreatic ductal and acinar cells, immune cells of the intestinal
stroma and ovarian granulosa cells.[166−169] Given that this is only a small
list of unique sites of AHR expression, it seems likely that this
receptor will be shown to have more than one significant role in normal
animal physiology and development.
Lessons from Ahr Null Rodents
Another
method used to identify putative physiological roles for the AHR is
to create mammalian models that are null for the Ahr gene product and assess the consequences of that null allele on
the host’s biology. Generation of the null allele has been
performed by at least three independent laboratories for the mouse
model and at least once in the rat model.[170,171,171,172,173] In rodent models, the Ahr null allele has again provided evidence that the AHR
regulates multiple
developmental and physiological processes. In this regard, Ahr null mice have been reported to display a number of
phenotypes, including patent ductus venosus, hepatic
atrophy, altered immunity, vascular defects, decreased barrier integrity
of the skin and gut, and reduced reproductive capacity.[12,162,166,174−183] While initial reports of variously generated mouse null alleles
appear to display some discordance, there is little evidence to indicate
that any differences are allelic; it is more likely they are due to
genetic background issues, unique pathogen loads, and different dietary
regimens.[176]Interestingly, the rat
null model displays a phenotype that is distinct from the mouse, with
pathological alterations primarily in the urinary tract and kidney
and no reported hepatovascular pathology (i.e., patent ductus
venosus) which is a hallmark mouse phenotype studied in our
laboratory.[173] Moreover, while immune effects
in the mouse have predominantly been studied for adaptive immunity
and T-lymphocyte biology, the effects in the rat have been reported
primarily for B-lymphocyte function.[184−186] Taken in sum, these
data strongly support a role for the AHR in normal biology, with initial
indications of an important role for this receptor in barrier integrity,
immunity, reproduction, vascular development, as well as hepatic and
renal biology.[166,184,187−189] Additionally, these cross-laboratory and
cross-species studies indicate that experimental environment and genetic
background are likely to have a marked influence on AHR null phenotypes
and AHR biology writ large.
Lessons from Evolution
Another strategy
to elucidate
the physiological role of the AHR is to study its evolution. Such
an approach anticipates that certain correlates might explain the
selective pressures that led to the receptor’s emergence and
maintenance in biological systems. The AHR, ARNT, and AHRR are members
of the bHLH-PAS family of transcription factors, which arose early
in evolution, with PAS domains having been found in plants, animals,
and bacteria.[62,190] Domains reminiscent of PAS domains
are found in prokaryotes, where they play roles in phototropism and
oxygen sensing, and in plants, where they are involved in photoreception
and phototransduction.[191]Diversification
of the PAS gene family occurred early in evolution. All of the major
bHLH-PAS gene subfamilies (e.g., AHR, ARNT, HIF, SIM, CLOCK, TRH,
BMAL, NCOA, NPAS4) are shared by protostomes and deuterostomes and
thus must have been present already in the ancestral bilaterian animal,
which lived ∼570 million years ago.[192,193] Metazoan PAS domain-containing proteins play roles in a variety
of signal transduction pathways, many of which are involved in developmental
processes and environmental adaptation.[194−196] Additional diversification of bHLH-PAS genes occurred early in the
vertebrate lineage as a result of two whole-genome duplications,[197] leading to the multiple paralogues (ohnologues)
within each subfamily that exist in most vertebrates, including mammals
(e.g., three HIF genes, two CLOCK genes).The AHR genes have
undergone duplication and diversification like
other bHLH-PAS genes, involving both whole-genome duplications as
well as a tandem duplication event. The presence of multiple AHR genes
in both bony and cartilaginous fishes suggests that the AHR gene duplications
occurred early in vertebrate evolution, well before the emergence
of mammals.[198,199] A tandem duplication produced
the genes now known as AHR1 and AHR2, which occur in fish, birds,
reptiles, and some early diverging mammals but have been lost from
most later mammalian groups. Another duplication event produced AHRR,
which evolved as a transcriptional repressor of AHR function.[100,200] In mammals, AHRR may exhibit additional regulatory interactions
besides repressing AHR activity, consistent with data demonstrating
that humanAHRR can have multiple effects on cell growth and differentiation.[200] Overall, phylogenetic and comparative genomic
analyses suggest that there are five groups (clades) in the AHR subfamily:
AHR, AHR1, AHR2, AHR3, and AHRR, which exhibit gene- and taxon-specific
functional specialization.[199]Functional
analyses of AHRs from extant vertebrate and invertebrate
species suggest that the ability to bind to planar aromatic compounds
such as PAHs and dioxins evolved in early vertebrates. It has been
hypothesized that one selective force may have been the need to detoxify
halogenated aromatic natural products, which are prominent in the
marine environment, where early vertebrates arose.[201,202] Although AHR homologues from invertebrate species appear to lack
the ability to bind PAHs and dioxins, it is unknown if they can be
activated by other types of ligands.While evolutionary information
does not point us toward a clear
physiological role for the AHR, some intriguing observations stand
out from this analytical approach. First, PAS domains have a propensity
to exist in sensor proteins of environmental stimuli such as light
and oxygen tension.[61,191,203] This role seems to have evolved early (prokaryotes and plants) and
been maintained throughout millions of years of evolution. The AHR’s
role as a chemical sensor is consistent with this idea. Second, the
AHR, as defined by phylogenetic analysis (orthology) within the bHLH-PAS
family, has been found in almost all eumetazoan groups.[199] This suggests that whatever evolutionary pressures
have led to the maintenance of this gene, they have existed for millennia.
Third, there may be a common thread that unites AHR function across
the metazoan: such as a role in controlling cell fate during the development
of neural systems and, in particular, sensory structures. For example,
in the cnidarian Nematostella, AHR is expressed in
the apical tuft (a sensory structure).[193] In arthropods (e.g., Drosophila), AHR controls
the development of the distal segment of the antenna (a chemosensory
structure), mechanosensory bristles, and photoreceptors.[204,205] In nematodes (e.g., C. elegans), AHR controls the
development of touch receptor neurons and sensory neurons that contact
the pseudocoelomic fluid.[206] Emerging evidence
for a role of AHR in neural development in mammals suggests this could
be one possible conserved role shared by all animals.[199,207] Despite these intriguing findings, it will remain a challenge to
identify conserved physiological roles of AHRs and to distinguish
them from novel functions that evolved in specific taxonomic groups.
Diversity of AHR Ligands
Structure–Activity Relationships
Early structure–activity
relationship (SAR) analysis based on various halogenated aromatic
hydrocarbons (HAHs), PAHs, and related compounds, suggested that the
AHR ligand-binding pocket binds near-planar ligands with dimensions
that approximated a 3 × 10 Å (Å) rectangle.[18,208] More recent analyses based, in part, on structure–activity
studies and on structural similarity to crystallized domains of other
PAS proteins, support the idea that absolute planarity is not a requirement
for receptor binding and that maximal dimensions of the ligand-binding
pocket may be more closely approximated by a pocket of 14 × 12
× 5 Å (reviewed in ref (154)). It has also been observed that both the hydrophobicity
and the polarizability of a compound’s substituents add an
additional layer of complexity in regards to affinity for AHR.[154,209−213] While current structural models are useful, a solved binding pocket
structure through X-ray crystallography or NMR is needed if we are
to confidently predict chemical binding to the AHR and anticipate
the biological effects that emerging environmental pollutants and
therapeutics will induce. In the meantime, those of us with limited
expertise in physical chemistry are left with a preliminary “flat
hydrophobic rectangle” (FHR) model as a predictor of AHR ligand-binding
activity (Figure ).
Figure 6
The flat
hydrophobic rectangle model of AHR ligands. Molecular
and ball and stick models of some AHR ligands discussed in this review
that conform to the FHR concept of ligand structure. The three-dimensional
structures are only provided as approximations, as some subtle bending
and puckering of structure may occur that is not predicted by common
algorithms. Figure was generated with ChemDraw
software.
The flat
hydrophobic rectangle model of AHR ligands. Molecular
and ball and stick models of some AHR ligands discussed in this review
that conform to the FHR concept of ligand structure. The three-dimensional
structures are only provided as approximations, as some subtle bending
and puckering of structure may occur that is not predicted by common
algorithms. Figure was generated with ChemDraw
software.Several reviews have provided
a comprehensive description of the
structural diversity of AHR ligands and sources.[24,154,209,214] While structural classification of AHR ligands based upon chemical
backbone is useful (dioxins, biphenyls, PAHs, flavonoids, etc.), it
is also useful to think of these compounds based upon nonstructural
properties, such as source, risk for human exposure, receptor binding
affinity, and biological half-life. In this regard, ligands coming
from anthropogenic sources such as diesel exhaust, commercial production,
or industrial contamination (PAHs, PCBs, and dioxins), are produced
as natural products, or they are generated endogenously in human tissues
(indigoids, indolocarbazoles, etc.). For many of these source classes,
member ligands display EC50 values or binding affinities
for the AHR that differ by multiple orders of magnitude. Ligands from
these source classes can also harbor markedly different biological
half-lives that span from hours to months.[215−217]
Importance of Proligands
An important concept to consider
is that many compounds that are thought to activate the AHR are not
actual ligands of the AHR but are proligands. Proligands are precursors
that are chemically transformed to the ultimate ligand, which strongly
binds to the AHR pocket. Proligands typically form the ultimate ligands
via condensation reactions of precursor molecules into larger planar,
more stable, polycyclic aromatics.[218,219] Such reactions
can often be spontaneous or nonenzymatic. The first discovered and
perhaps clearest example of a proligand is indole 3-carbinol (I3C)
produced in broccoli, Brussels sprouts, and kale. This naturally occurring
3-substituted indole is produced from enzymatic breakdown in the plant
tissue from a glucosinolate known as glucobrassicin.[219−221] Indole-3-carbinol was originally studied as an anticarcinogenic
substance by virtue of its activity as an inducer of carcinogen metabolism.[222,223] The premise was that dietary I3C protected against coadministered
carcinogens such as BAP and DMBA by “blocking” their
action through a reduction in their relative metabolic flux to ultimate
electrophiles that damage DNA.[224] Interestingly,
we now know that I3C itself is not a ligand of the AHR, but when I3C
is ingested, it hits the low pH environment of the stomach and spontaneously
undergoes an acid-catalyzed condensation reaction, converting it to
a variety of AHR ligands including the potent agonist indolo[3,2-b]carbazole (ICZ).[219,225,226] Condensation products of I3C, such as ICZ, are high-affinity binders
of the AHR and can be found in the bloodstream after exposure to I3C
in the diet.[219]One important lesson
to be learned from the proligand idea is that when a compound does
not fit the FHR model described above, some caution should be ascribed
to any inclusion of the compound into a list of bona fide endobiotic or xenobiotic ligands. A list of “nonclassical”
compounds that activate CYP1A1 expression but that do not obviously
fit the FHR model is included in a recent review and includes SKF71739,
thiabendazole, omeprazole, and 1,5-diaminonapthalene.[154] We propose that, often, such ligands may actually
be proligands. In addition to I3C described above, a number of other
examples support the concept that proligands are a common source of
receptor activation, including the identification of alanineserine
aminotransferase (AST) and D-amino acid oxidase (DAO) as enzymes capable
of activating the AHR in cell culture.[227,228] The biochemical
explanation for receptor activation by these enzymes is the generation
of indole-3-pyruvic acid (I3P) from tryptophan (TRP) through deamination.[227,229] Like I3C, I3P is a reactive indole, and this α-keto acid spontaneously
condenses to a number of di-indol structures and possibly related
backbones that are the ultimate AHR ligands or a more proximal precursor
to them.[229] Similarly, in recent studies
of the immune system, numerous laboratories made the observation that
small relatively polar immunomodulators produced from TRP by the enzyme
indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) can activate the AHR.[230] Given the lack of fit of many of these IDO
products to the FHR model, it was again shown that IDO products such
as kynurenine (KYN) or 3-hydroxyanthranilic acid (3HAA) are also proligands
that are converted to a series of “trace extended aromatic
condensation products” (TEACOPs).[231,232] It is probable that molecules such as these are high-affinity ligands
and potent AHR agonists in vivo.The idea that
proligands may be more common than is currently appreciated
may explain how AHR ligands display so much reported structural diversity.
In our simplistic view, it may be that all AHR ligands must fit the
FHR model, and when a structure does not fit, it is more likely a
proligand rather than a true ligand. Either it is being converted
to a TEACOP or the TEACOP is a trace contaminant of the material being
used in the experiment. In this regard, if one examines a potential
ligand with a high EC50 for induction of an AHRE-mediated
response, some consideration of the possibility that the ligand is
contaminated with, or is generating TEACOPs, should be considered.
In this regard, I3C has an EC50 that is approximately 5
orders of magnitude higher than ICZ for competition with TCDD for
AHR occupancy (i.e., 5 orders of magnitude lower affinity).[219] In the absence of acid condensation conditions,
the I3C response may be explained by the contamination of ICZ equivalents
at 1 part in 100 000 (0.001%). We argue that many compounds
that are activators of the AHR at high concentrations may be contaminated
with or generate a series of TEACOPs, thereby confusing structure–activity
relationships.
Classifying Ligands: Xenobiotic, Endobiotic,
and Cognate
We often think of AHR ligands as existing in
two physiologic classes:
“xenobiotic” and “endobiotic.” We employ
the term xenobiotic for those compounds found in an organism that
are not produced within that organism. Their presence in the organism
is “foreign” or from a foreign source (“xeno”).[233] Common sources of xenobiotic ligands include
diesel exhaust (e.g., PAHs), chlorophenol manufacturing (e.g., dioxins),
or pharmaceutics (e.g., omeprazole). Xenobiotic ligands can also be
“natural” and include normal constituents of fruits
and vegetables (e.g., chrysin, quercetin, and galanin).[234−236] In contrast, we reserve the term endobiotic ligand to denote any
AHR ligand that is produced readily in a given biological system,
including within the gastrointestinal tract. A few widely studied
endogenous ligands are 6-formylindolo[3,2-b]carbazoles
(FICZ), 2-(1′H-indole-3-carbonyl)-thiazole-carboxylic
acid methyl ester (ITE), indigo, indirubin, and bilirubin.[237−240]A final definition that may also be useful going forward is
the term “cognate.” We use this term to refer to those
ligands that have provided the selective pressure for the evolutionary
conservation of the AHR. This class of ligand has also been referred
to as “the endogenous ligand”, “the physiological
ligand”, or even “the ancient ligand.” We define
cognate ligands as those ligands that correspond to the evolutionary
pressure that has led to the emergence and maintenance of this receptor
through evolution. Put another way, these are the ligands that have
the most important consequences on normal physiology. In the absence
of these ligands, the organism cannot thrive under all developmental
and physiological stresses. This concept of the cognate ligand is
important, because it implies that the AHR has evolved in parallel
with a ligand (or set of ligands) as its evolutionary pressure. In
turn, this implies that the AHR has a physiological role that is separate
from and in addition to the adaptive metabolism of xenobiotics.
Xenokine Model of Ah Receptor Signaling
In a previous
review, rudimentary models of AHR signaling have been put forth that
might explain how potent DLCs lead to the dioxin toxic syndrome.[18,36] Given that many of those models are still untested or unrefuted,
we have turned our attention toward an understanding of the AHR’s
cognate signaling with the underlying idea that such insight will
explain many of the pathological consequences of DLCs. Based upon
this history, the ideas presented above, and the models of toxicity
described previously, we close this manuscript with an attempt to
provide testable models of AHR cognate signaling. While our initial
plan was to summarize all the ideas that have been put forth in the
peer-reviewed literature, we found that there were so many ideas and
so much intriguing evidence, that we could not objectively integrate
them all. In this regard, the remarkable breadth of phenotypes influenced
by AHR biology is provided in a recent review and reflects a potential
role for this receptor in almost every major organ system and an influence
on processes as diverse as cell cycle progression, immunity, DNA biochemistry,
reproduction, and circadian rhythmicity.[12] Therefore, we chose to articulate a parsimonious model that employs
ideas borrowed from the works of many AHR scientists but that is interpreted
through the prism of our own laboratory’s research experience
over the last 30 years.[12,18,170,187,241−246]This integrated model of cognate signaling has its roots in
the adaptive metabolism of PAHs, dioxin toxicology, and recent results
from AHR null mouse models.[12,18,170,187,242−246] We refer to this way of thinking about AHR biology as the “xenokine
model.” The xenokine model is based on the idea that there
is parallelism between AHR’s role in the adaptive metabolism
of xenobiotic environmental ligands and a similar class of endobiotic
ligands that we collectively think of as “xenokines.”
These xenokines are generated within the organism but commonly outside
of cells, such as in interstitial spaces, the lumens of organs, or
regions of cellular disruption. We propose that these xenokines are
generated by endogenous chemical reactions that generate agonists
in a manner similar to the generation of agonists found in the environment.
In turn, these xenokines are sensed by the AHR, which stimulates a
transcriptional response that is linked to a new physiological state
better adapted to the new challenge they represent. Like the adaptive
response to xenobiotics, it follows that the pathway is under feedback
regulation and xenokine action is rapidly attenuated through CYP1
induction, AHRR upregulation, and so on.We predict that xenokines
may be as structurally varied as the
spectrum of known environmental ligands but will fit the FHR model
described above. We anticipate that the identification of all cognate
ligands may be difficult to achieve due to the possibility that each
tissue or organ system may have its own unique variety of xenokines
that arise from the distinctive chemistries of each specific tissue
and environmental stimuli. While the exact identity of the cognate
ligands are still to be elucidated, evidence from the literature suggests
they could arise from products of polyunsaturated fatty acids or heme
metabolites, or they could be produced from aromatic amino acids like
TRP through enzymatic reactions, nonenzymatic condensation reactions,
free radical reactions, microbial metabolism, inflammation, and UV
irradiation.[12,154,209,247−252]Aromatic amino acids such as TRP and phenylalanine are potentially
important proligands and sources of AHR cognate ligands.[227,253−255] In fact, the molecule that has the most
experimental support for this definition of xenokine is the TRP photoproduct
and TEACOP known as FICZ.[247] Evidence that
this indolocarbazole is an important cognate ligand includes the observations
that FICZ harbors an AHR binding affinity among the highest ever observed,
is produced endogenously at epithelial barriers in response to UV
irradiation, and appears to play a role in AHR-mediated immune and
epithelial response to environmental stressors including bacterial
invasion, oxygen stress, and UV damage.[187,247] Moreover, FICZ is rapidly metabolized by the CYP1 monooxygenases,
implying its levels are tightly regulated by the feedback loop described
above.[215] Lesser but provocative evidence
exists for the physiological importance of additional TRP-related
xenokines at other tissues. For the intestinal barrier, evidence supports
the idea that TRP metabolites arising from gut microflora play important
roles in activating AHR signaling to influence gut barrier integrity
through influence on intestinal lymphocyte populations (e.g. refs (256−258)). Even more speculative is the idea that
products of the enzyme DAO, which harbors metabolic activity toward d-amino acids such as d-TRP found in bacteria, or AST,
which harbors metabolic activity toward TRP, can both generate the
AHR proligand I3P.[227−278,229,253] Thus, oxidases, deaminases, and transaminases like these have potential
to generate proligands and ultimately xenokines in vivo. Enzymatic mechanisms such as these also have the potential to generate
xenokines not only at environmental interfaces but also internally
under conditions of tissue damage, inflammation, or remodeling.In its simplest form, the above model can be summarized as follows.
Tissues experience alterations in their external environment or their
neighboring cellular environment, through inflammation, tissue damage,
UV exposure, developmental remodeling, and changes in microbial populations
or oxygen concentration. Each of these changes yields a unique chemistry
that produces xenokines through reactive proligand intermediates that
activate an AHR-mediated physiological response at the tissue level.
In the gut and skin, the response is exemplified by increased barrier
integrity, possibly through an influence on resident lymphocyte populations.
In the lungs, hyperoxia may be eliciting its own unique chemistry
and subsequent xenokine production to adapt to a new higher oxygen
tension or microbiological challenges presented by the ambient air
at parturition.[249,259] In the vascular system, tone
and vascular remodeling may respond to systemic release of xenokines
or through internal production consequent to cellular remodeling,
changes in oxygen tension, or shear stress.[260,261]
Outputs of Xenokine Signaling
This perspective has
emphasized the AHR signaling pathway as an adaptive metabolic system
with the plan to dedicate a future perspective on the identities of
those target or output genes that might facilitate the physiological
and toxicological consequences of receptor activation. While evidence
for the significance of this pathway in adaptive metabolic ligand
clearance is recounted above, two pieces of evidence show how tightly
this adaptive response must be regulated in vivo.
In one example, competitive inhibition of CYP1 activity by ligands
was shown to influence the signaling of the putative cognate ligand
FICZ, presumably by reducing its clearance and increasing its steady
state.[215] In another example, the global/constitutive
expression of the Cyp1a1 gene in the mouse induced
a partial phenocopy of the AHR null phenotype, presumably by reducing
levels of an essential cognate ligand and/or CYP1A1 substrate.[262]It is also important to note here that
there is evidence both for and against the centrality of CYP 1s as
outputs essential for the physiological or toxicological effects of
this receptor. Arguing for their importance as outputs is evidence
that such monooxygenases influence the levels of lipid mediators (LMs)
derived from polyunsaturated fatty acids or arachidonic acid.[12,250] Such LMs could have broad vaso- and immune activities that may ultimately
explain aspects of DLC toxicology or phenotypes observed in AHR null
models. A separate idea is that some of DLC toxicity or cognate physiology
may be mediated through AHR’s role as a sensor of reactive
oxygen species or even mediator of an oxidative stress response.[263−266] While many related ideas have been proposed, one of the longest-standing
is that the upregulation of CYP1-dependent monooxygenases leads to
an increase in reactive oxygen species, which in turn can influence
cellular physiology.[267−269] Arguing against the importance of CYP 1s
as important output genes are observations from our own laboratory,
in which the CYP1A1/CYP1A2 upregulation can be genetically dissociated
from hallmark phenotypes of the AHR null model (e.g., patent ductus venosus) or classical toxic end points from TCDD
exposure.[270,271]Finally, the AHR field
has been heavily focused on the idea that
a cognate ligand exists. While we have argued for the importance of
xenokine ligands as well as the adaptive response for xenobiotic and
xenokine ligands, the AHR may also function constitutively in some
situations. Such a possibility is supported by the expansive evolutionary
data described above, where AHR orthologues exist that do not appear
to recognize any ligand and appear to signal constitutively and the
observation that ligand recognition of PAHs seems to be a vertebrate
receptor characteristic. Despite all the data on the hundreds of xenobiotic
ligands and the preliminary data related to cognate ligands like FICZ,
we must be accepting of the formal possibility that the AHR is a bifunctional
transcription factor, a transcription factor with both intrinsic activity
and ligand-inducible transactivating properties.
In Closing
The AHR field is abundant with evidence
for its role in biological processes as disparate as immunity, vascular
biology, stemness, neurosensory signaling, reproduction, cell cycle
regulation, and nucleic acid biochemistry. We began this perspective
with the objective of developing a comprehensive review of modern
thought related to the role of the AHR in normal human physiology.
The review evolved into a discussion of the adaptive metabolism paradigm
and the promotion of the xenokine model. We conclude recognizing that
we have only touched the surface, only having discussed a small portion
of the provocative ideas that have been put forth over the past 50
years. As we move forward into the next half-century of AHR research
we must continue asking: How can all these AHR-mediated biological
processes be true? How can dioxins cause so many distinctive effects?
As this effort unfolds, we suspect that the simpler answer will be
the correct one and look forward to the development of an understanding
of AHR signal transduction that unifies the many scientific disciplines
that have been touched by this enigmatic signaling molecule.
Authors: Jiasheng Song; Margaret Clagett-Dame; Richard E Peterson; Mark E Hahn; William M Westler; Rafal R Sicinski; Hector F DeLuca Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2002-10-30 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Matteo Villa; Stefania Crotta; Kevin S Dingwell; Elizabeth M A Hirst; Manolis Gialitakis; Helena Ahlfors; James C Smith; Brigitta Stockinger; Andreas Wack Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Rachel H Wilson; Patrick R Carney; Edward Glover; Jessica C Parrott; Brenda L Rojas; Susan M Moran; Jeremiah S Yee; Manabu Nukaya; Nicholas A Goetz; Clifford D Rubinstein; Kathy J Krentz; Yongna Xing; Christopher A Bradfield Journal: Toxicol Sci Date: 2021-04-12 Impact factor: 4.849