 |
« back to all literature
| Title |
Chemical-activated luciferase gene expression (CALUX): a novel in vitro bioassay for Ah receptor active compounds in sediments and pore water. |
| Autor(s) |
Murk AJ, Legler J, Denison MS, Giesy JP, van de Guchte C, Brouwer A |
| Journal |
Fundam Appl Toxicol |
| Year |
1996 |
| Volume |
33(1): |
| Pages |
149-160 |
| |
|
| Subject(s) |
DR-CALUX,
Sediment,
Pore water
|
| Summary |
 |
This study demonstrates that thenovel in vitro CALUX
(chemical-activated luciferase expression) assay is a rapid, sensitive assay for assessing the
toxic potencyof (mixtures of) aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR)-active compoundsin sediments and
pore waters. A rat hepatoma (H4IIE) cell line,stably transfected with a construct containing
the dioxin-responsiveelement (DRE) sequence and the luciferase reporter gene, was usedto
determine the relative potency or the total activities of AhR-activecompounds in sediment
and pore water extracts. This novel CALUXassay had a detection limit of 0.5 fmol of
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin(TCDD). The sensitivity and linear working range was
slightlybetter than for the ethoxyresorufin O-deethylase (EROD) assay inH4IIE wild type cells.
The primary improvement of the CALUX assaycompared to the EROD assay, however, is that the
CALUX assay isinsensitive to substrate inhibition. The CALUX activity inducedby organic
extracts from 450-mg aliquots of sediment or 250-microlaliquots of pore water corresponded
with the instrumentallyanalyzed degree of pollution of the sediment. Using pore water,only
a simple and rapid extraction procedure was needed, withoutadditional clean-up to prevent
cell death. The response from porewater samples in an 8-day early life stage test with
zebra fish (Branchydaniorerio) corresponded with the CALUX induction, although thecorrelation
was sometimes disturbed by heavy metals. Twopolychlorinated terphenyl mixtures, the
PCB-substitute Ugilec 141,polybrominated diphenylethers, and the PCB-mixture Clophen
A50were tested in the CALUX assay and had induction potencies thatwere 10(-4)-10(-7)
compared to TCDD.
[back up]
|
|