A comparison of behavioral and reproductive parameters between wild-type, transgenic and mutant zebrafish: Could they all be considered the same “zebrafish” for reglementary assays on endocrine disruption?
|Author(s)||de Oliveira Julie1, Chadili Edith1, Turies Cyril1, Brion François1, Cousin Xavier2, 3, Hinfray Nathalie1|
|Affiliation(s)||1 : INERIS, Unité d'écotoxicologie in vitro et in vivo, UMR I-02 SEBIO, Verneuil-en-Halatte, France
2 : MARBEC Univ. Montpellier, CNRS, Ifremer, IRD, Palavas-les-Flots, France
3 : Univ. Paris-Saclay, AgroParisTech, INRAE, GABI, France
|Source||Comparative Biochemistry And Physiology C-toxicology & Pharmacology (1532-0456) (Elsevier BV), 2021-01 , Vol. 239 , P. 108879 (8p.)|
|WOS© Times Cited||3|
|Keyword(s)||Zebrafish, Casper, Transgenic, Behavior, Reproduction|
Transgenic zebrafish models are efficiently used to study the effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDC); thereby informing on their mechanisms of action. However, given the reported differences between zebrafish strains at the genetical, physiological and behavioral levels; care should be taken before using these transgenic models for EDC testing. In the present study, we undertook a set of experiments in different transgenic and/or mutant zebrafish lines of interest for EDC testing: casper, cyp19a1a-eGFP, cyp19a1a-eGFP-casper, cyp11c1-eGFP, cyp11c1-eGFP-casper. Some behavioral traits, and some biochemical and reproductive physiological endpoints commonly used in EDC testing were assessed and compared to those obtained in WT AB zebrafish to ensure that transgene insertion and/or mutations do not negatively modify basal reproductive physiology or behavior of the fish.
Behavioral traits considered as anxiety and sociality have been monitored. Sociality was evaluated by monitoring the time spent near congeners in a shuttle box while anxiety was evaluated using the Novel tank diving test. No critical difference was observed between strains for either sociality or anxiety level. Concerning reproduction, no significant difference in the number of eggs laid per female, in the viability of eggs or in the female circulating VTG concentrations was noted between the 5 transgenic/mutants and the WT AB zebrafish studied.
In summary, the transgene insertion and the mutations had no influence on the endpoints measured in basal conditions. These results were a prerequisite to the use of these transgenic/mutant models for EDC testing. Next step will be to determine the sensitivity of these biological models to chemical exposure to accurately validate their use in existing fish assays for EDC testing.