Abstract

Inhibition of complex I of the mitochondrial respiratory chain (cI) by rotenone and methyl-phenylpyridinium (MPP +) leads to the degeneration of dopaminergic neurons in man and rodents. To formally describe this mechanism of toxicity, an adverse outcome pathway (AOP:3) has been developed that implies that any inhibitor of cI, or possibly of other parts of the respiratory chain, would have the potential to trigger parkinsonian motor deficits. We used here 21 pesticides, all of which are described in the literature as mitochondrial inhibitors, to study the general applicability of AOP:3 or of in vitro assays that are assessing its activation. Five cI, three complex II (cII), and five complex III (cIII) inhibitors were characterized in detail in human dopaminergic neuronal cell cultures. The NeuriTox assay, examining neurite damage in LUHMES cells, was used as in vitro proxy of the adverse outcome (AO), i.e., of dopaminergic neurodegeneration. This test provided data on whether test compounds were unspecific cytotoxicants or specifically neurotoxic, and it yielded potency data with respect to neurite degeneration. The pesticide panel was also examined in assays for the sequential key events (KE) leading to the AO, i.e., mitochondrial respiratory chain inhibition, mitochondrial dysfunction, and disturbed proteostasis. Data from KE assays were compared to the NeuriTox data (AO). The cII-inhibitory pesticides tested here did not appear to trigger the AOP:3 at all. Some of the cI/cIII inhibitors showed a consistent AOP activation response in all assays, while others did not. In general, there was a clear hierarchy of assay sensitivity: changes of gene expression (biomarker of neuronal stress) correlated well with NeuriTox data; mitochondrial failure (measured both by a mitochondrial membrane potential-sensitive dye and a respirometric assay) was about 10–260 times more sensitive than neurite damage (AO); cI/cIII activity was sometimes affected at > 1000 times lower concentrations than the neurites. These data suggest that the use of AOP:3 for hazard assessment has a number of caveats: (i) specific parkinsonian neurodegeneration cannot be easily predicted from assays of mitochondrial dysfunction; (ii) deriving a point-of-departure for risk assessment from early KE assays may overestimate toxicant potency.

Highlights

  • Comparison of 21 data-rich mitochondrial toxicants for neurotoxicity Quantitative comparison of key event triggering thresholds for adverse outcome pathway (AOP):3 Comparison of two cell models and two exposure times for neurotoxicity

  • Impair mitochondrial function, we investigated whether an extended AOP:3, starting at complex II (cII) or complex III (cIII), could be substantiated with data indicating a link between cII/cIII inhibition and dopaminergic neurodegeneration, or whether complex I (cI) inhibition is a special situation that is not recapitulated by other mitochondrial respiratory chain (MRC) inhibitors

  • The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) #3 was used to guide the experiments performed in this study on inhibitors of mitochondrial respiratory chain (MRC) complexes I, II, and III

Read more

Summary

Introduction

While there are many known mitochondrial toxicants, it is unclear whether they all lead to the same adverse outcomes (AO) in the nervous system. In the context of the European Research project EU-ToxRisk (Daneshian et al 2016; Escher et al 2019; Graepel et al 2019), a set of 21 compounds was used to establish assays for mitochondrial respiratory chain functionality in neurons (Delp et al 2019) and for testing in different non-neuronal cell systems (representing liver and kidney) (van der Stel et al 2020) It could not be clarified in these studies, how the different modes of mitochondrial respiratory chain inhibition related to (or predicted) dopaminergic neurotoxicity, and how different assays of AOP: key events were correlated. To address this question, we used LUHMES and SH-SY5Y cells. We worked backwards through the chain of KEs toward the KE1 (which is here overlapping with the MIE)

Materials and methods
Results and discussion
Conclusions and outlook
Compliance with ethical standards
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call