Effect of Water-Pipe Smoking on the Normal Development of Zebrafish.
developmental biology
toxicity testing
waterpipe smoking
zebrafish
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 11 2021
06 11 2021
Historique:
received:
27
09
2021
revised:
26
10
2021
accepted:
02
11
2021
entrez:
13
11
2021
pubmed:
14
11
2021
medline:
19
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Among all types of tobacco consumption, Water-Pipe Smoking (WPS) is the most widely used in the Middle East and second-most in several other countries. The effect of WPS on normal development is not yet fully understood, thus the aim of this study is to explore the acute toxicity effects of WPS extract on zebrafish larvae. In this study, we compared the effects of WPS smoke condensates at concentrations varying from 50 to 200 µg/mL on developmental, cardiac, and behavioural (neurotoxicity) functions. Gene expression patterns of cardiac biomarkers were also evaluated by RT-qPCR. Exposing zebrafish embryos to 50, 100, 150 and 200 µg/mL WPS for three days did not affect the normal morphology of Zebrafish embryos, as the tail flicking, behavioural and locomotion assays did not show any change. However, WPS deregulated cardiac markers including atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP/NPPA) and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP/NPPB). Furthermore, it induced apoptosis in a dose-dependent manner. Our data demonstrate that WPS can significantly affect specific cardiac parameters during the normal development of zebrafish. Further investigations are necessary to elucidate the pathogenic outcome of WPS on different aspects of human life, including pregnancy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Among all types of tobacco consumption, Water-Pipe Smoking (WPS) is the most widely used in the Middle East and second-most in several other countries. The effect of WPS on normal development is not yet fully understood, thus the aim of this study is to explore the acute toxicity effects of WPS extract on zebrafish larvae.
METHODS
In this study, we compared the effects of WPS smoke condensates at concentrations varying from 50 to 200 µg/mL on developmental, cardiac, and behavioural (neurotoxicity) functions. Gene expression patterns of cardiac biomarkers were also evaluated by RT-qPCR.
RESULTS
Exposing zebrafish embryos to 50, 100, 150 and 200 µg/mL WPS for three days did not affect the normal morphology of Zebrafish embryos, as the tail flicking, behavioural and locomotion assays did not show any change. However, WPS deregulated cardiac markers including atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP/NPPA) and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP/NPPB). Furthermore, it induced apoptosis in a dose-dependent manner.
CONCLUSION
Our data demonstrate that WPS can significantly affect specific cardiac parameters during the normal development of zebrafish. Further investigations are necessary to elucidate the pathogenic outcome of WPS on different aspects of human life, including pregnancy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34770174
pii: ijerph182111659
doi: 10.3390/ijerph182111659
pmc: PMC8582815
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Natriuretic Peptide, Brain
114471-18-0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Biomed Res Int. 2018 Sep 27;2018:1642684
pubmed: 30363733
Med Princ Pract. 2008;17(6):435-9
pubmed: 18836270
Toxicol Lett. 2013 May 23;219(2):133-42
pubmed: 23454654
Trends Cardiovasc Med. 2008 May;18(4):150-5
pubmed: 18555188
Respir Res. 2021 May 18;22(1):151
pubmed: 34006276
Hypertension. 2003 Jul;42(1):88-95
pubmed: 12756220
Kidney Blood Press Res. 2020;45(3):467-476
pubmed: 32434202
Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2003 Nov;14(9):411-6
pubmed: 14580760
Micron. 2020 Sep;136:102876
pubmed: 32512409
PLoS One. 2014 Dec 19;9(12):e115305
pubmed: 25526262
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Sep 28;14(10):
pubmed: 28956852
Development. 2014 Jan;141(2):335-45
pubmed: 24353062
Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2008 Jun;4(3):567-76
pubmed: 18830398
Cardiovasc Res. 2012 Mar 1;93(3):463-70
pubmed: 22198505
Mycobiology. 2020 Sep 8;48(5):399-409
pubmed: 33177919
Cardiovasc Res. 2004 Mar 1;61(4):771-9
pubmed: 14985074
Cancer Cell Int. 2018 Nov 13;18:180
pubmed: 30473629
Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2015 May 15;308(10):F1047-55
pubmed: 25651559
J Intern Med. 2020 Nov;288(5):605-606
pubmed: 32237242
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2019 May 14;7:96
pubmed: 31139625
BMC Public Health. 2011 Apr 19;11:244
pubmed: 21504559
Tob Control. 2004 Dec;13(4):327-33
pubmed: 15564614
Nat Rev Cancer. 2003 Jul;3(7):533-9
pubmed: 12835673
Tob Control. 2015 Mar;24 Suppl 1:i3-i12
pubmed: 25298368
Dev Dyn. 2017 Nov;246(11):868-880
pubmed: 28249360
Biochem J. 2001 Nov 15;360(Pt 1):39-47
pubmed: 11695990
Nicotine Tob Res. 2018 Mar 6;20(4):502-507
pubmed: 28605482
Nicotine Tob Res. 2013 Jan;15(1):231-7
pubmed: 22573726
Front Cell Dev Biol. 2021 May 20;9:662583
pubmed: 34095129
Epidemiol Health. 2018 Mar 13;40:e2018008
pubmed: 29529859
Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2013 Jan;17(1):83-90
pubmed: 23776857
Food Chem Toxicol. 2005 May;43(5):655-61
pubmed: 15778004
PLoS One. 2015 May 15;10(5):e0126259
pubmed: 25978043
Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2012;52:433-53
pubmed: 22017682
Nature. 2013 Apr 25;496(7446):498-503
pubmed: 23594743
Physiol Genomics. 2010 Jul 7;42(2):300-9
pubmed: 20388839
J Biol Eng. 2018 Jan 12;12:2
pubmed: 29344085
Methods Mol Biol. 2018;1797:487-495
pubmed: 29896711