Laccase-Mediated Transformations of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals Abolish Binding Affinities to Estrogen Receptors and Their Estrogenic Activity in Zebrafish
- 604 Downloads
Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are known to mainly affect aquatic organisms, producing negative effects in aquaculture. Transformation of the estrogenic compounds 17β-estradiol (E2), bisphenol-A (BPA), nonylphenol (NP), and triclosan (TCS) by laccase of Coriolopsis gallica was studied. Laccase is able to efficiently transform them into polymers. The estrogenic activity of the EDCs and their laccase transformation products was evaluated in vitro as their affinity for the human estrogen receptor alpha (hERα) and for the ligand binding domain of zebrafish (Danio rerio) estrogen receptor alpha (zfERαLBD). E2, BPA, NP, and TCS showed higher affinity for the zfERαLBD than for hERα. After laccase treatment, no affinity was found, except a marginal affinity of E2 products for the zfERαLBD. Endocrine disruption studies in vivo on zebrafish were performed using the induction of vitellogenin 1 as a biomarker (VTG1 mRNA levels). The use of enzymatic bioreactors, containing immobilized laccase, efficiently eliminates the endocrine activity of BPA and TCS, and significantly reduces the effects of E2. The potential use of enzymatic reactors to eliminate the endocrine activity of EDCs in supply water for aquaculture is discussed.
KeywordsBisphenol-A Endocrine disruption Estrogen receptor Zebrafish Laccase Nonylphenol Triclosan Immobilized laccase Vitellogenin
We thank Dr. Takuya Nishigaki for his help in the spectrofluorometric analyses, and Dr. Armando Bravo and Dr. Omar Pantoja for their technical support with real-time PCR analysis. We also thank Jorge Hernández and Jaime García for technical support in fish culture. This work was supported by a grant from the National University of Mexico (DGAPA-UNAM IN-201611) and by scholarship from the National Council of Science and Technology (C. Torres-Duarte).
- 4.Sanderson, J.T. (2006) Toxicological Sciences, 94, 3–21.Google Scholar
- 10.Vazquez-Duhalt, R., Marquez-Rocha, F., Ponce, E., Licea, A. F., & Viana, M. T. (2006). Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 4, 1–25.Google Scholar
- 14.Giesy, J. P., & Snyder, E. M. (1998). In R. J. Kendall, R. L. Dickerson, J. P. Giesy, & W. A. Suk (Eds.), Principles and processes for evaluating endocrine disruption in wildlife (pp. 155–237). Pensacola: SETAC.Google Scholar
- 24.Chefetz, B., Chen, Y., & Hadar, Y. (1998). Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 64, 3175–3179.Google Scholar
- 30.De la Mora, E., Lovett, J. E., Blanford, C. F., Garman, E. F., Valderrama, B., & Rudino-Pinera, E. (2012). Acta Crystallographica Section D, 68, 564–577.Google Scholar
- 31.Pickard, M. A., Roman, R., Tinoco, R., & Vazquez-Duhalt, R. (1999). Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 65, 3805–3809.Google Scholar
- 37.Levin, R. D., & Lias, S. G. (1982). Ionization potential and appearance potential measurements, 1971–1981. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards.Google Scholar
- 42.Nakai, M. (2003). MEDAKA: development of test methods and suitability of medaka as test organism for detection of endocrine disrupting chemicals. Ministry of the Environment, Japan and Chemicals Evaluation and Research Institute, Japan, pp. 21–26.Google Scholar