Toxicity comparison of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA), and hexafluoropropylene oxide trimer acid (HFPO-TA) in zebrafish gut.
Toxicity comparison of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA), and hexafluoropropylene oxide trimer acid (HFPO-TA) in zebrafish gut.
复制标题
全氟辛酸（PFOA）、六氟环氧丙烷二聚酸（HFPO-DA）和六氟环氧丙烷三聚酸（HFPO-TA）在斑马鱼肠道中的毒性比较。
DOI：
10.1016/j.aquatox.2023.106655
复制
发表时间：
2023-08
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Yonghua Wang;X. Chen;Beibei Wang;G. Lu;Jianchao Liu;Donghai Wu;Zhenhua Yan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yonghua Wang;X. Chen;Beibei Wang;G. Lu;Jianchao Liu;Donghai Wu;Zhenhua Yan
六氟环氧丙烷二聚酸（HFPO-DA）和六氟环氧丙烷三聚酸（HFPO-TA）被视为全氟辛酸（PFOA）的替代品。以斑马鱼为实验动物，研究了不同浓度的PFOA、HFPO-DA和HFPO-TA（5 μg/L和500 μg/L）对斑马鱼肠道氧化损伤、炎症反应和细胞凋亡的影响。此外，还分析了肠道代谢组谱和微生物群落结构的变化。结果表明，与PFOA暴露相比，HFPO-DA和HFPO-TA暴露导致氧化损伤水平较低。然而，所有三种治疗对炎症和细胞凋亡的影响相当。受三种暴露影响的主要生物学途径是脂质代谢、核苷酸代谢、氨基酸代谢和环境信息处理。在浓度为5 μg/L时，HFPO-DA和HFPO-TA对代谢物组谱的影响远高于PFOA。在500 μg/L浓度下，HFPO-DA和HFPO-TA的效果与PFOA相似。这项研究还检查了肠道微生物群与上述毒性作用之间的Pearson相关性。三种目标化学物质中特定凋亡相关属的丰度不同，表明它们在诱导凋亡方面可能起不同的作用。HFPO-DA和HFPO-TA之间的相关性基本相似，这有助于解释在其各自的治疗组中观察到的对代谢特征的相似影响。总的来说，这项研究表明，HFPO-DA和HFPO-TA可能不是PFOA的安全替代品，并提供了有价值的见解，了解其在水环境中的毒性影响和风险评估。
Hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA) and hexafluoropropylene oxide trimer acid (HFPO-TA) are considered as alternatives to perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). In this study, zebrafish were exposed to different concentrations of PFOA, HFPO-DA, and HFPO-TA (5 μg/L and 500 μg/L), and the toxic effects on oxidative damage, inflammation, and cell apoptosis in the gut were compared. Additionally, changes in gut metabolome profiles and microbial community structure were analyzed. The results revealed that exposures to HFPO-DA and HFPO-TA led to lower levels of oxidative damage compared to PFOA exposure. However, all three treatments had comparable effects on inflammation and apoptosis. The main biological pathways affected by all three exposures were lipid metabolism, nucleotide metabolism, amino acid metabolism, and environmental information processing. The effects on metabolome profiles were much higher for HFPO-DA and HFPO-TA compared to PFOA at a concentration of 5 μg/L. At a concentration of 500 μg/L, HFPO-DA and HFPO-TA showed similar effects to PFOA. This study also examined the Pearson correlations between gut microbiota and the toxic effects mentioned above. The abundance of specific apoptosis-related genera differed among the three target chemicals, suggesting they may act differently in inducing apoptosis. The correlations between HFPO-DA and HFPO-TA were mostly similar, which helps explain the similar effects observed in their respective treatment groups on metabolic profiles. Overall, this study indicates that HFPO-DA and HFPO-TA may not be safe alternatives to PFOA and provides valuable insights into their toxic effects and risk assessment in water environments.