4.6 Article

A Dominant Negative Zebrafish Ahr2 Partially Protects Developing Zebrafish from Dioxin Toxicity

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 6, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028020

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) [R01 ES012716, T32 ES07015]
  2. University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute, National Sea Grant College, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce [NA 16RG2257]
  3. [R/BT-20]
  4. [R/BT-22]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The toxicity by 2,3,7,8 tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) is thought to be caused by activation of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR). However, our understanding of how AHR activation by TCDD leads to toxic effects is poor. Ideally we would like to manipulate AHR activity in specific tissues and at specific times. One route to this is expressing dominant negative AHRs (dnAHRs). This work describes the construction and characterization of dominant negative forms of the zebrafish Ahr2 in which the C-terminal transactivation domain was either removed, or replaced with the inhibitory domain from the Drosophila engrailed repressor protein. One of these dnAhr2s was selected for expression from the ubiquitously active e2f alpha promoter in transgenic zebrafish. We found that these transgenic zebrafish expressing dnAhr2 had reduced TCDD induction of the Ahr2 target gene cyp1a, as measured by 7-ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase activity. Furthermore, the cardiotoxicity produced by TCDD, pericardial edema, heart malformation, and reduced blood flow, were all mitigated in the zebrafish expressing the dnAhr2. These results provide in vivo proof-of-principle results demonstrating the effectiveness of dnAHRs in manipulating AHR activity in vivo, and demonstrating that this approach can be a means for blocking TCDD toxicity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available