Evaluation of Embryotoxicity Using the Zebrafish Model

Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1641)

Abstract

The embryonic zebrafish model offers the power of whole-animal investigations (e.g., intact organism, functional homeostatic feedback mechanisms, and intercellular signaling) with the convenience of cell culture (e.g., cost- and time-efficient, minimal infrastructure, small quantities of solutions required). The model system overcomes many of the current limitations in rapid to high-throughput screening of drugs/compounds and casts a broad net to rapidly evaluate integrated system effects. Additionally, it is an ideal platform to follow up with targeted studies aimed at the mechanisms of toxic action. Exposures are carried out in multi-well plates so minimal solution volumes are required for the assessments. Numerous morphological, developmental, and behavioral endpoints can be evaluated noninvasively due to the transparent nature of the embryos.

Key words

Zebrafish Development Embryos In vivo Vertebrate Rapid screening High-throughput screening 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Sinnhuber Aquatic Research Laboratory and the Environmental Health Sciences Center at Oregon State University where much of the protocols were developed. This work was supported by NIEHS grants P30 ES000210.

References

  1. 1.
    Harper SL et al (2008) Proactively designing nanomaterials to enhance performance and minimise hazard. Int J Nanotechnol 5(1):124–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reif DM et al (2016) High-throughput characterization of chemical-associated embryonic behavioral changes predicts teratogenic outcomes. Arch Toxicol 90(6):1459–1470CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Truong L et al (2014) Multidimensional in vivo hazard assessment using zebrafish. Toxicol Sci 137(1):212–233CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Levin ED et al (2004) Developmental chlorpyrifos effects on hatchling zebrafish swimming behavior. Neurotoxicol Teratol 26(6):719–723CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blechinger SR et al (2002) Developmental toxicology of cadmium in living embryos of a stable transgenic zebrafish line. Environ Health Perspect 110(10):1041–1046CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rasooly RS et al (2003) Genetic and genomic tools for zebrafish research: the NIH zebrafish initiative. Dev Dyn 228(3):490–496CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rubinstein AL (2003) Zebrafish: from disease modeling to drug discovery. Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel 6(2):218–223PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Spitsbergen J, Kent M (2003) The state of the art of the zebrafish model for toxicology and toxicologic pathology research—advantages and current limitations. Toxicol Pathol 31:62–87PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Howe K et al (2013) The zebrafish reference genome sequence and its relationship to the human genome. Nature 496(7446):498–503CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kimmel CB et al (1995) Stages of embryonic development of the zebrafish. Dev Dyn 203(3):253–310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Westerfield M (1995) The Zebrafish Book. University of Oregon Press, EugeneGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Henken DB et al (2003) Recent papers on Zebrafish and other aquarium fish models. Zebrafish 1:305–311Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Akimenko MA et al (1995) Differential induction of four msx homeobox genes during fin development and regeneration in zebrafish. Development 121(2):347–357PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martinez-Sales M, Garcia-Ximenez F, Espinos FJ (2015) Zebrafish (Danio rerio) as a possible bioindicator of epigenetic factors present in drinking water that may affect reproductive function: is chorion an issue? Zygote 23(3):447–452CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henn K, Braunbeck T (2011) Dechorionation as a tool to improve the fish embryo toxicity test (FET) with the zebrafish (Danio rerio). Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol 153(1):91–98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim KT, Tanguay RL (2014) The role of chorion on toxicity of silver nanoparticles in the embryonic zebrafish assay. Environ Health Toxicol 29:e2014021CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mandrell D et al (2012) Automated zebrafish chorion removal and single embryo placement: optimizing throughput of zebrafish developmental toxicity screens. J Lab Autom 17(1):66–74CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Harper S et al (2008) In vivo biodistribution and toxicity depends on nanomaterial composition, size, surface functionalisation and route of exposure. J Exp Nanosci 3(3):195–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Olivares CI et al (2016) Arsenic (III, V), indium (III), and gallium (III) toxicity to zebrafish embryos using a high-throughput multi-endpoint in vivo developmental and behavioral assay. Chemosphere 148:361–368CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Noyes PD et al (2015) Advanced morphological—behavioral test platform reveals neurodevelopmental defects in embryonic zebrafish exposed to comprehensive suite of halogenated and organophosphate flame retardants. Toxicol Sci 145(1):177–195CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Busquet F et al (2008) Development of a new screening assay to identify proteratogenic substances using zebrafish Danio rerio embryo combined with an exogenous mammalian metabolic activation system (mDarT). Toxicol Sci 104(1):177–188CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental and Molecular ToxicologyOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA
  2. 2.Sinnhuber Aquatic Research LaboratoryOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations