Skip Navigation


ToxSci Advance Access originally published online on May 2, 2003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
74/1/157    most recent
kfg097v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vinson, R. K.
Right arrow Articles by Hales, B. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vinson, R. K.
Right arrow Articles by Hales, B. F.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Toxicological Sciences 74, 157-164 (2003)
Copyright © 2003 by the Society of Toxicology


REPRODUCTIVE AND DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICOLOGY

Genotoxic Stress Response Gene Expression in the Mid-Organogenesis Rat Conceptus

Robert K. Vinson and Barbara F. Hales1

Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 3655 Promenade Sir William Osler, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada H3G 1Y6

The ability of the conceptus to respond to genotoxic stress may be critical for normal development, particularly after exposure to genotoxic teratogens. Members of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) superfamily are involved in controlling cell cycle activity and maintaining genomic stability. The expression of PI3K family members ATM, ATR, and DNA-PKcs, and downstream genes p53, GADD45, and p21, was examined in the mid organogenesis rat conceptus in vivo on gestational days (GD) 10 through 12 and in vitro following exposure to genotoxic stress. ATM was the most highly expressed PI3K family member in both yolk sac and embryo proper, with transcript levels increasing ~fourfold in the embryo from GD 10 to 12. Transcript concentrations for ATR, DNA-PKcs, and downstream genes were low in both tissues; all genes had increased transcript levels exclusively in the GD 12 embryo. Transient oxidative stress, induced by short-term, in vitro embryo culture, had no effect on transcript levels in either tissue. Culture for 24 or 44 h significantly decreased ATM transcript levels in both embryo and yolk sac, but downstream genes were unaffected compared to GD-11 and -12 in vivo levels, respectively. Exposure to 4-hydroperoxycyclophosphamide (4-OOHCPA), an activated form of the nitrogen mustard cyclophosphamide (CPA), had no effect on transcript levels for any of the genes examined. Therefore, while transcripts for genotoxic stress-response genes are present in the mid organogenesis rat conceptus, their expression is not regulated by exposure in culture to either transient oxidative stress or a genotoxic alkylating agent. The inability of the conceptus to upregulate transcripts in response to insult may contribute to an increased susceptibility to stressors during organogenesis.

Key Words: DNA damage; oxidative stress; cyclophosphamide; phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase; gene expression; cell cycle checkpoint.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
Y. Bhuller, W. Jeng, and P. G. Wells
Variable In Vivo Embryoprotective Role for Ataxia-Telangiectasia-Mutated against Constitutive and Phenytoin-Enhanced Oxidative Stress in Atm Knockout Mice
Toxicol. Sci., September 1, 2006; 93(1): 146 - 155.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
Y. Bhuller and P. G. Wells
A Developmental Role for Ataxia-Telangiectasia Mutated in Protecting the Embryo from Spontaneous and Phenytoin-Enhanced Embryopathies in Culture
Toxicol. Sci., September 1, 2006; 93(1): 156 - 163.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.