4.5 Article

Comparative toxicogenomic examination of the hepatic effects of PCB126 and TCDD in immature, ovariectomized C57BL/6 mice

期刊

TOXICOLOGICAL SCIENCES
卷 102, 期 1, 页码 61-75

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfm289

关键词

PCB126; TCDD; TEF; liver; mouse; toxicogenomics

资金

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [P42ES04911] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polychlorinated biphenyls are persistent environmental pollutants that elicit a wide range of effects in humans and wildlife, mediated by the aryl hydrocarbon receptor. 3,3',4,4',5-pentachlorobiphenyl (PCB126) is the most potent congener with relative effect potencies ranging from 0.0026 to 0.857, and a toxic equivalency factor (TEF) of 0.1 set by an expert panel of the World Health Organization. In this study, the hepatic effects elicited by 300 mu g/kg PCB126 were compared with 30 mu g/kg 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) in immature, ovariectomized female C57BL/6 mice. Comprehensive hepatic gene expression analyses with complementary histopathology, high-resolution gas chromatograph/high-resolution mass spectrometer tissue analysis, and clinical chemistry were examined. For temporal analysis, mice were orally gavaged with PCB126 or sesame oil vehicle and sacrificed after 2, 4, 8, 12, 18, 24, 72, 120, or 168 h. In the dose-response study, mice were gavaged with 0.3, 1, 3, 10, 30, 100, 300, 1000 mu g/kg PCB126, 30 or 100 mu g/kg TCDD and sacrificed after 72 h. 251 and 367 genes were differentially expressed by PCB126 at one or more time points or doses, respectively, significantly less than elicited by TCDD. In addition, there was less vacuolization and necrosis, and no immune cell infiltration, despite comparable or higher TEF-adjusted hepatic PCB126 levels. The functional annotation of differentially expressed genes was consistent with the observed histopathology. Collectively, the data indicate that 300 mu g/kg PCB126 elicited a subset of weaker effects compared with 30 mu g/kg TCDD in immature, ovariectomized C57BL/6 mice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据