HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Submit a Letter to Editor Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Karchner, S. I. Articles by Hahn, M. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Karchner, S. I. Articles by Hahn, M. E. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 47, 33814-33824, November 19, 1999

Identification and Functional Characterization of Two Highly Divergent Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptors (AHR1 and AHR2) in the Teleost Fundulus heteroclitus
EVIDENCE FOR A NOVEL SUBFAMILY OF LIGAND-BINDING BASIC HELIX LOOP HELIX-PER-ARNT-SIM (bHLH-PAS) FACTORS^*

Sibel I. Karchner, Wade H. Powell, and Mark E. Hahn

From the Biology Department, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

The aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR) is a ligand-activated transcription factor through which 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) and related compounds cause altered gene expression and toxicity. The AHR belongs to an emerging multigene family of transcription factors possessing basic helix loop helix (bHLH) and Per-ARNT-Sim (PAS) domains. Most bHLH-PAS proteins occur as duplicates or "paralog groups" in mammals, but only a single mammalian AHR has been identified. Here we report the cDNA cloning of two distinct AHRs, designated FhAHR1 and FhAHR2, from a single vertebrate species, the teleost Fundulus heteroclitus (Atlantic killifish). Both Fundulus AHR proteins possess bHLH and PAS domains that are closely related to those of the mammalian AHR. FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 are highly divergent (40% overall amino acid identity; 61% identity in the N-terminal half), suggesting that they arose from a gene duplication predating the divergence of mammals and fish. Photoaffinity labeling with 2-azido-3-[¹²⁵I]iodo-7,8-dibromodibenzo-p-dioxin and velocity sedimentation analysis using 2,3,7,8-[1,6-³H]TCDD showed that both FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 exhibit specific, high-affinity binding of dioxins. Both AHRs also showed specific, TCDD- and ARNT-dependent interactions with a mammalian xenobiotic response element. The two Fundulus AHR genes displayed different tissue-specific patterns of expression; FhAHR1 transcripts were primarily expressed in brain, heart, ovary, and testis, while FhAHR2 transcripts were equally abundant in many tissues. Phylogenetic analysis demonstrated that Fundulus AHR1 is an ortholog of mammalian AHRs, while AHR2 forms in Fundulus and other fish are paralogous to Fundulus AHR1 and the mammalian AHRs and thus represent a novel vertebrate subfamily of ligand-binding AHRs.

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

The aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR)¹ is a ligand-activated transcription factor through which 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) and other polyhalogenated and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons cause altered gene expression and toxicity (1-3). The AHR and its dimerization partner ARNT (AHR nuclear translocator) belong to an emerging family of transcription factors that contain basic helix loop helix (bHLH) and Per-ARNT-Sim (PAS) domains (4, 5). Many of the mammalian bHLH-PAS family members occur as "paralog groups," each of which contains duplicated genes with related functions (two to three genes per group, reviewed in Refs. 5 and 6). In contrast, a mammalian AHR paralog group like those of other bHLH-PAS proteins has not been reported.

Members of the bHLH-PAS family play key roles in development, hypoxia-induced gene expression, the control of circadian rhythmicity, and phototransduction (reviewed in Refs. 4 and 5). Unlike most other bHLH-PAS family proteins, the AHR is ligand-activated, although its endogenous ligand is not known. The AHR acts in concert with ARNT to regulate target genes such as cytochrome P450-1A1 (CYP1A1) via binding to consensus xenobiotic responsive enhancer elements (XREs) (3, 7). In addition to its role in regulating drug-metabolizing enzymes, possible endogenous functions for the AHR include cell cycle control (8, 9), developmental signaling (10-12), and modulation of growth factor signal transduction pathways (13, 14).

We are using the estuarine fish Fundulus heteroclitus (mummichog or Atlantic killifish) as an early vertebrate model for studying the evolution and adaptive significance of AHR signaling pathways. This species has several features that make it a valuable experimental system (15). F. heteroclitus is abundant in both pristine and polluted environments; it is sensitive to dioxins but is capable of developing heritable dioxin resistance after multigenerational exposure (16-18). Unlike some nonmammalian vertebrate models, such as rainbow trout and Xenopus laevis, F. heteroclitus is diploid (19), facilitating the analysis of gene function and diversity. The developmental biology and population genetics of F. heteroclitus are well known (20, 21). Finally, this species possesses an inducible CYP1A1 (22), indicating the existence of a functional AHR signaling system.

Recently, we reported the presence of AHR (23, 24) and ARNT (25) homologs in F. heteroclitus. In the course of these studies, we obtained evidence for a second F. heteroclitus AHR gene. Partial sequences of these two Fundulus AHRs (PAS domains only) were reported as part of a phylogenetic analysis of the bHLH-PAS family (6). Here we report the full cDNA sequence and functional characterization of both F. heteroclitus AHRs (FhAHR1 and FhAHR2). These AHR paralogs are highly divergent (40% overall amino acid identity; 61% identity in the more conserved N-terminal half), yet both proteins exhibit specific, high affinity binding of dioxins as well as ligand- and ARNT-dependent binding to XRE sequences. Differences in the structural features, ligand-binding specificity, and patterns of expression of FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 suggest distinct functions.

The cloning of two distinct AHRs from F. heteroclitus, a teleost fish, provides the first definitive evidence for a vertebrate AHR paralog group. A single AHR form has been cloned from each of several mammalian species (26-30). AHR full-length cDNA sequences have been reported from three other species of fish: tomcod (31), zebrafish (32), and trout (33). In trout, two AHR forms have been identified. However, these share 97% amino acid identity, indicating that they are derived from a restricted gene duplication related to the recent tetraploid ancestry of salmonid fish. Here we show that F. heteroclitus AHR2 and all of the full-length AHRs reported from other fish species (including both trout AHRs) belong to a distinct AHR2 clade that is paralogous to, and separate from, FhAHR1 and the mammalian AHRs reported to date. The AHR2 clade thus represents a novel subfamily of ligand-binding bHLH-PAS proteins within the vertebrate AHR family.

	EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

Materials

A Fundulus  FixII genomic library was kindly provided by Dr. Dennis Powers and Dr. Joel Sohn (Hopkins Marine Station, Pacific Grove, CA). A second Fundulus  FixII genomic library was a gift from Dr. Douglas Crawford (University of Missouri, Kansas City, MO). Mouse AHR cDNA clones were generously provided by Dr. Alan Poland (University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI) (26). Human AHR (pSPORThAhr2), mouse AHR (pSPORTMAHR), and human ARNT1 (pSPORTARNT) expression vectors (26, 28) were generously provided by Dr. C. Bradfield (University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI). 2,3,7,8-Tetrachloro[1,6-³H]dibenzo-p-dioxin ([³H]TCDD; 35 Ci/mmol) was obtained from Chemsyn Science Laboratories (Lenexa, KS) and purified to 95% radiochemical purity by high performance liquid chromatography (34). 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran (TCDF) was obtained from Ultra Scientific (Hope, RI). Methylated [methyl-¹⁴C]ovalbumin was obtained from NEN Life Science Products Inc. (Boston, MA). Methylated [methyl-¹⁴C]catalase was synthesized as described (35). Degenerate primers for -actin (36) were a gift from Dr. M. Sogin (Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, MA). These were used to amplify an 1100-bp partial -actin cDNA from Fundulus liver by RT-PCR with annealing at 52 °C. Fundulus-specific actin primers (actin F and actin R) were designed based on the sequence of this fragment.

Fish Collection and RNA Isolation

F. heteroclitus (mummichog) were collected in salt marshes on Cape Cod, MA. The dissected organs were immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen. Total RNA was isolated using RNA STAT-60 (Tel-Test B, Inc.). Poly(A)⁺ RNA was purified with oligo(dT) spin columns (5 Prime  3 Prime, Inc.).

Oligonucleotide Primers

Primers were synthesized by National Biosciences, Inc. or Life Technologies, Inc. and were used as described. Primer sequences were: 1-76R, 5'-GGTACGTGACGCTCAGGCGCAGGATGGACAG-3'; 1-109R, 5'-TGCTTTTCTGCAGCTCCTGTTGTCTCG-3'; 1-191R, 5'-GCTGTCAGGTTCCATCT-3'; 1-239R, 5'-TGAGCCTGCCCTGGATG-3'; 1-252F, 5'-AGGAAAGGCCACGCCCC-3'; 1-256R, 5'-GGCGTGGCCTTTCCTCCATTTTCTCGC-3'; 1-317R, 5'-AGCCTGATCCTCGAACTCGTAGTTCAGC-3'; 1-439R, 5'-CCTTAACAGCCTCTCACC-3'; 1-780F: 5'-AGCGACAGCTGTCCTGACAGCGTCCAG-3'; 1-846F, 5'-CAGGTGATCTCCAGCCTGGCTCAGTGC-3'; 2-119R, 5'-GCGCCTGGAGCAGCAGCT-3'; 2-131R, 5'-CCTTCAGACGTGACCACC-3'; 2-134F, 5'-CTTCTACGCCTCTCCTAC-3'; 2-151F, 5'-GTGGTCCATCAGAGCGTG-3'; 2-191R, 5'-GCCCTGAGAGAATTCTG-3'; 2-410F, 5'-CAACACAGGCCCCACCATGGACATCTC-3'; 2-475F, 5'-GTTGGCAGCAACGAGTGGCAAGAGAGC-3'; 1F, 5'-CGAGCCAAACACTTCTTCTCTGTCAC-3'; 1Ra, 5'-AGCTGCTGTCAGGTTCCATCTCTTGG-3'; 2F, 5'-AGGGTCAAGAGCTACTTTAAAGCTTC-3'; 2Ra, 5'-TTAGCACAGCCCTGAGAGAATTCTGC-3'; actin F, 5'-CCATTGGCAACGAGAGGTTCCGTTGC-3'; actin R, 5'-CTCATCGTACTCCTGCTTGCTGATCC-3'; 5' actin, 5'-GAATTCTGCAGACAACGGYTCSGGYATGTGC-3'; 3' actin, 5'-CTCGAGGATCCGAAGCAYTTGCGRTGWACRAT-3'; 1kz, 5'-GATGAAGCTTGCCACCATGGTCCCTGCTGAGGGGACCAAGTCC-3'; 1KOZ-H3, 5'-GATGAAGCTTGCCACCATGTATGCTGGACG-3'; 1pETRev, 5'-GCATCTCGAGCACAATATACCTTCCCCTCAGAAG-3'; 1pETF, 5'-GGAATTCCATATGGGGACCAAGTCCAATCCGTC-3'; M2f, 5'-GATGCTCGAGCCACCATGGCTGTGAACCCGGGGACG-3'; 2-1090R, 5'-GGGGTACCGGTGTCTTTTGCTTGAAGGCACAGC-3'; Qf, 5'-AACCCITCIAAGMGICAYMG-3'; AhR-A1, 5'-CGGGATCCARGCICTSAAYGGITT-3'; AhR-B1, 5'-GCTCTAGACATICCRCTYTCICCIGTYTT-3'; 1L-888F, 5'-CCAGTACCAGTAAGATCACAACC-3'; 1L-960R, 5'-AGGTAAGCAAGGCAAGGACAAGG-3'; 1S-888F, 5'-CCAGTACCAGTAAGATGAAGAAAGG-3'; 1S-1015R, 5'-TCAATGTCACATAGACTCTTCACAGC-3'.

Cloning and Sequencing Procedures

RT-PCR One µg of poly(A)⁺ RNA was reverse transcribed with random hexamers using the Gene-Amp RNA-PCR kit (Perkin-Elmer) following the manufacturer's directions. The anneal/extend temperature varied (50-60 °C) based on the primers used. In some cases, an additional extension period of 1 min at 72 °C was added to the cycling.

Cloning and DNA Sequencing The PCR products were cloned into pCNTR (5 Prime  3 Prime, Inc.), pT7Blue(R) (Novagen), or pGEM-T Easy (Promega). Large inserts were digested with various restriction enzymes and subcloned into pBluescript KS (Stratagene) for sequencing using SequiTherm Excel II long-read cycle sequencing kits (Epicentre Technologies, Madison, WI) and an automated DNA sequencer (LI-COR 4000L). Both strands from multiple clones were sequenced to ensure accuracy.

Genomic Library Screening The first Fundulus  FixII genomic library (Powers) was screened using mouse AHR cDNA fragments of 423 and 700 bp (spanning amino acid residues numbers 26-420) that were labeled with [-³²P]dCTP by random priming. Hybridization was in 20% formamide, 6 × SSPE, 5 × Denhardt's, and 0.1% SDS at 37 °C. Filters were washed in 2 × SSC, 0.1% SDS at 48 °C. Approximately 3 × 10⁵ plaques were screened. One positive plaque was identified and  DNA was isolated. Multiple restriction enzymes were used to digest the  DNA and several fragments were subcloned into pBluescript (Stratagene) and sequenced. Approximately 4 × 10⁵ plaques from the second Fundulus genomic library (Crawford) were screened using a 690-bp partial FhAHR2 cDNA fragment (amino acid residues number 117-331) (24) as described above. Seven positive plaques were identified and  DNA was isolated. Restriction fragments from these genomic clones were subcloned and sequenced.

cDNA Library Construction and Screening F. heteroclitus liver and heart cDNA libraries were constructed using ZAP-cDNA Gigapack II Gold cloning kit (Stratagene). Approximately 1.9 × 10⁶ plaques were screened from each library using ³²P-labeled partial FhAHR1 (amino acid residues numbers 252-440) and FhAHR2 (amino acid residues numbers 117-331) cDNAs. Filters were prehybridized in 50% formamide, 6 × SSPE, 0.1% SDS, and 0.05 × blotto at 42 °C. Hybridization was carried out in the same solution at 42 °C overnight. Filters were washed at 65 °C in 2 × SSC, 0.1% SDS prior to autoradiography. One FhAHR2 positive plaque from the heart cDNA library was isolated and the pBluescript phagemid containing the insert was excised and sequenced.

5'-3' RACE Adaptor-ligated, oligo(dT)-primed, double-stranded liver or ovary cDNA was synthesized using a Marathon cDNA Amplification kit (CLONTECH). Gene specific primers were coupled with adaptor primers in the PCR reactions and the products were cloned and sequenced. For FhAHR1 5'-RACE, primer 1-256R and nested primer 1-239R were used. For FhAHR1 3'-RACE, primer 1-780F and nested primer 1-846F were used. For FhAHR2 3'-RACE, primer 2-410F and nested primer 2-475F were used. In a modified FhAHR1 5'-RACE procedure, cDNA synthesis was performed at a higher temperature to overcome secondary structure in RNA. The first-strand cDNA was synthesized with the Thermoscript RT System (Life Technologies) at 70 °C with a gene-specific primer, 1-317R. Following second-strand synthesis and adaptor ligation, primers 1-109R and nested 1-76R were used for the PCR.

Circular RACE (cRACE) Liver cDNA was synthesized with Moloney murine leukemia virus reverse transcriptase (Stratagene) primed with a 5'-phosphorylated oligonucleotide, 2-191R (37). The single-stranded cDNA was circularized by T4 RNA ligase. The circular cDNA was amplified with the primer pair 2-134F/2-131R and re-amplified with nested primers 2-151F/2-119R.

Other Methods

Sequence Analysis AHR amino acid sequences were aligned using ClustalW, version 1.7 (38) and these aligned sequences were used to construct phylogenetic trees using distance (Neighbor-Joining algorithm) and maximum parsimony (PAUP 4.0b1; Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, MA 01375 (39)) criteria.

Expression Constructs

pETFhAHR1_22-942-- The 1pETF/1pETRev primer pair was used to amplify FhAHR1 cDNA encoding amino acid residues numbers 22-942 plus 139 bp of 3'-UTR. The PCR product was digested with NdeI and XhoI (primer sites) and cloned into the same sites in pET15b vector (Novagen).

pSPFhAHR1_18-942-- A 590-bp HindIII/EcoRI fragment containing residues numbers 18-207 was excised from a 737-bp RT-PCR product (1kz/1-256R primers). The upstream primer (1kz) contained an initiation methionine in the context of a Kozak consensus sequence (40), resulting in a change in one amino acid residue (T18V). A 2345-bp EcoRI/XhoI fragment (residues numbers 208-942 and 3'-UTR) was excised from the pETFhAHR1_22-942 construct. These fragments containing residues 18-207 and 208-942/3'-UTR were ligated together into the HindIII/SalI sites of the pSP64poly(A) vector (Promega).

pSPFhAHR1-- A 783-bp fragment of FhAHR1 was amplified with the 1KOZ-H3/1-256R primer pair from cDNA synthesized in the modified FhAHR1 5'-RACE reaction. A 630-bp HindIII/EcoRI fragment encoding residue numbers 1-207 (including a consensus Kozak sequence) was excised from this PCR product and ligated into pSP64poly(A) together with residue numbers 208-942/3'-UTR as described for the pSPFhAHR1_18-942 construct.

pDPFhAHR2-- The M2f/2-1090R primer pair was used to amplify a 3250-bp FhAHR2 cDNA from liver. The Kozak consensus sequence was incorporated into the 5' primer M2f. The PCR product was digested with XhoI and KpnI (primer sites) and ligated into the SalI/KpnI sites of pDP18 (Ambion, Inc.). Advantage cDNA polymerase mixture (CLONTECH) was used in the PCR reactions to maximize fidelity of amplification. All FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 cDNA constructs were verified by complete sequencing.

In Vitro Protein Synthesis TNT Quick Coupled Reticulocyte Lysate Systems (Promega) were used to synthesize unlabeled or ³⁵S-labeled proteins following manufacturer's directions. Five µl of the TNT reactions were subjected to SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, followed by fluorography and autoradiography. The ³⁵S-labeled proteins were quantified by scintillation counting of excised gel fragments.

Photoaffinity Labeling Fundulus AHR1 and AHR2 proteins, encoded by pSPFhAHR1_18-942 and pDPFhAHR2, respectively, were synthesized by in vitro transcription and translation and labeled with 2-azido-3-[¹²⁵I]iodo-7,8-dibromodibenzo-p-dioxin as described by Dolwick et al. (28).

Velocity Sedimentation Analysis AHR proteins were synthesized by in vitro transcription and translation and analyzed by velocity sedimentation on sucrose gradients in a vertical tube rotor (41). For each AHR, two identical TNT reactions (100 µl total) were combined, diluted 1:1 with MEEDMG buffer (25 mM MOPS, pH 7.5, 20 °C, containing 1 mM dithiothreitol, 1 mM EDTA, 5 mM EGTA, 0.02% NaN₃, 20 mM Na₂MoO₄, 10% (v:v) glycerol (23) plus a mixture of protease inhibitors (23)), split into two 100-µl aliquots, and incubated with [³H]TCDD (2 nM) ± TCDF (400 nM) for 1-2 h at 4 °C. The [³H]TCDD concentration was verified by sampling each tube for total counts. After incubation, 90 µl from each tube were applied to 10-30% sucrose gradients that were prepared in MEEDMG buffer using the method of Coombs and Watts (42). The gradients were spun for 140 min at 60,000 rpm at 4 °C in a VTi 65.2 rotor, after which 150-µl fractions were counted using a Beckman LS5000TD scintillation counter. Specific binding is defined as the difference between total binding (incubations containing [³H]TCDD) and nonspecific binding (incubations containing [³H]TCDD plus a 200-fold excess of TCDF). [¹⁴C]Ovalbumin (3.6 S) and [¹⁴C]catalase (11.3 S) were added as internal sedimentation markers; they eluted in fractions ~3-4 and ~15-16, respectively, as indicated. Sedimentation coefficients of AHR proteins were determined by the method of Martin and Ames (43).

Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay Electrophoretic mobility shift assays were performed essentially as described (25), using combinations of proteins synthesized in TNT lysates (2.5 µl each) as detailed in the legend to Fig. 7. Following incubation of the proteins for 2 h in the presence of dimethyl sulfoxide or 25 nM TCDD in dimethyl sulfoxide, 1 µg of poly[d(I·C)] (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) was added, NaCl concentration adjusted to 100 mM, and reactions incubated an additional 15 min with or without 100 ng of unlabeled mouse XRE probe or mutated XRE probe (mutated core sequence is 5'-TTGCTTG-3'; mutated base underlined). Finally, 1 ng of ³²P-end labeled mouse XRE probe (mouse DRE3 (44) approximately 10⁵ cpm) was added and the reactions incubated for 15 min more. Samples were electrophoresed on 4% polyacrylamide (29:1 acrylamide:bis) gels in 0.5 × TBE (45 mM Tris, 45 mM boric acid, 1 mM EDTA). The dried gel was subjected to autoradiography.

Prior to use in the DNA binding assay, unprogrammed and ARNT-containing TNT lysates were extracted once with a quantity of dextran-coated charcoal equal to the mass of total protein in the sample. Because Fundulus AHR proteins are inactivated by charcoal treatment,² TNT lysates were extracted once with dextran-coated charcoal prior to AHR synthesis (0.1 mg/mg protein). Charcoal treatments reduced sequence-specific, constitutive background XRE binding.

Tissue-specific Expression Poly(A)⁺ RNA (1 µg) was reverse transcribed with random primers (Gene-Amp RNA-PCR kit, Perkin-Elmer) and an equal aliquot of cDNA was used in each of three PCR reactions with AmpliTaq Gold DNA polymerase (Perkin-Elmer). The primer pairs used were 1F/1Ra, 2F/2Ra, and actin F/actin R for FhAHR1, FhAHR2, and -actin, respectively. The primer pairs for FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 were designed to overlap exon-exon junctions, thereby avoiding amplification of any contaminating genomic DNA. All three sets of primers were designed to amplify similar length fragments (372, 346, and 349 bp for FhAHR1, FhAHR2, and -actin, respectively) to minimize differences in the efficiency of amplification. The linear range for the PCR was determined by varying the number of cycles from 20 to 35 with 3-cycle increments and using 2, 4, 6, and 8 µl of template cDNA (data not shown). Five µl of template cDNA and 28 cycles were chosen as the amplification parameters. The cycling conditions were: 95 °C/10 min (94 °C/15 s, 60 °C/30 s) for 28 cycles; 72 °C/7 min. Under these conditions, the amount of PCR products amplified from gonad cDNA was linearly related to cycle number and amount of template. Ten-µl aliquots of each reaction (volume verified to be in the linear range for imaging) were subjected to agarose gel electrophoresis and subsequent ethidium bromide staining. The gels were photographed using a Kodak DCS 200 digital camera and Adobe Photoshop software. The integrated density of each amplified fragment was determined from the digital image by NIH Image software, version 1.60.

The relative abundance of FhAHR1 and FhAHR1 transcripts in different tissues was assessed via semi-quantitative RT-PCR as described above, except that cDNA synthesis was primed with oligo(dT). The upstream primers (1S-888F for  and 1L-888F for ) spanned the splice junction at which the sequences diverge. The downstream primers (1S-1015R for  and 1L-960R for ) hybridized to the 3'-UTR in each transcript. The amplified fragments were 379 and 216 bp for FhAHR1 and FhAHR1, respectively.

	RESULTS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

Identification of Two AHR Genes in F. heteroclitus-- We initially used two approaches to identify and clone a Fundulus AHR. In the first approach, RT-PCR using liver RNA and degenerate primers AhR-A1/AhR-B1 produced a 690-bp partial AHR cDNA, the sequence of which we reported previously (24). For the second approach, mouse AHR cDNA fragments (26) were used as probes to screen a Fundulus genomic library at low stringency. One positive plaque was isolated and several contiguous fragments spanning 9 kilobases from this genomic clone were subcloned and sequenced. Coding regions were identified based on sequence similarity to mammalian AHR exons 7, 8, 9, and 10 (26, 45). Surprisingly, the deduced amino acid sequence of the genomic clone shared only 62% identity with the RT-PCR product, suggesting the presence of an additional AHR gene in F. heteroclitus. To confirm the presence of two AHR genes in this species, a second genomic library was screened at low stringency using the 690-bp RT-PCR product as probe. The seven positive clones belonged to two groups, corresponding to the two sequences obtained previously. These two genes were designated FhAHR1 (first identified from the genomic clone) and FhAHR2 (first identified as the RT-PCR product), for reasons explained under "Discussion." The complete coding sequences of FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 cDNAs were obtained via additional RT-PCR, screening of cDNA libraries, and RACE procedures, as illustrated in Fig. 1 and described below. The full-length sequences reported here confirm and extend our earlier suggestion of two AHRs in this species, based on partial sequences (6, 24).

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1.   Cloning strategy for Fundulus AHR cDNAs. A, Fundulus AHR1 (FhAHR1); B, Fundulus AHR2 (FhAHR2). RT-PCR and RACE fragments are shown with oligonucleotide pairs used. Genomic segment for FhAHR1 represents the joined exon sequences obtained from the genomic clone. Full-length expression construct inserts pSPFhAHR1 and pDPFhAHR2 are shown. Translated regions are boxed. bHLH domain, PAS domain A and B repeats, and the FhAHR1 glutamine-rich region (amino acid residues 649-838) are indicated.

FhAHR1 cDNA-- Using primers 1-252F and 1-439R, designed based on the FhAHR1 genomic DNA sequence, a 567-bp fragment was amplified from heart cDNA. Degenerate primers AhR-A1 and Qf were coupled with specific primers 1-239R and 1-191R in RT-PCR reactions that yielded an additional 593 bp of coding sequence. The remainder of the coding and UTR sequence for FhAHR1 was obtained by 5'- and 3'-RACE (Fig. 1). Two distinct 3'-RACE products (1 and 1) were identified (Fig. 2). Sequence of genomic clones in this region indicated that the 1 and 1 cDNAs are generated by differential exon splicing at a point corresponding to codon 876 (Fig. 2). As assessed by semi-quantitative RT-PCR, FhAHR1 is the predominant or only form expressed in all tissues; a very low level of FhAHR1 expression was detectable only in ovary (data not shown). Based on these results, we chose to concentrate our subsequent characterization efforts on the FhAHR1 cDNA. FhAHR1 has an open reading frame of 942 amino acid residues that encodes a protein with a predicted molecular mass of 103.7 kDa.

View larger version (73K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2.   Nucleotide and deduced amino acid sequence for FhAHR1 cDNA. Amino acid residues are numbered on the left. The stop codon is indicated by an asterisk (*). Splice sites deduced from the genomic sequence are indicated by triangles (). The nucleotide and predicted amino acid sequences of the alternatively spliced cDNAs (1 and 1) identified by RACE are identical up to amino acid residue 876; genomic sequence indicates that the site of sequence divergence corresponds to a splice junction, indicated by a filled circle (). After residue 876, the C terminus extends for another 49 and 23 amino acid residues in 1 and 1, respectively. FhAHR1 and FhAHR1 cDNAs have open reading frames of 942 and 916 amino acid residues, with predicted protein molecular masses of 103.7 kDa for FhAHR1 and 101.4 kDa for FhAHR1. The relative abundance of FhAHR1 and FhAHR1 cDNAs in several tissues was determined by RT-PCR. In all tissues where transcripts were found, FhAHR1 was the predominant form; a very low level of FhAHR1 expression was detectable only in the ovary (data not shown). All subsequent data were obtained with the FhAHR1 cDNA. Domains of FhAHR1 potentially involved in transactivation include: acidic (D/E), amino acids 556-588; P/S/T-rich, amino acids 611-625 and 844-939; Gln-rich, 649-838. The nucleotide sequences of FhAHR1 and FhAHR1 have been deposited in the GenBank data base with accession numbers AF024591 and AF190654, respectively.

FhAHR2 cDNA-- Screening of Fundulus heart and liver cDNA libraries with the 690-bp RT-PCR product resulted in isolation of a partial (1.84 kilobases) heart cDNA. The N-terminal sequence, including 45 bp of 5'-UTR for FhAHR2, was obtained by cRACE. A 1.9-kilobase 3'-RACE product provided the rest of the coding sequence and 560 bp of 3'-UTR (Fig. 1). The full-length FhAHR2 contains 905 amino acids with a predicted molecular mass of 99.9 kDa (Fig. 3).

View larger version (88K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3.   Nucleotide and deduced amino acid sequence for FhAHR2 cDNA. Amino acid residues are numbered on the left. The stop codon is indicated by an asterisk (*). Splice sites deduced from the genomic sequence are indicated by triangles (). The nucleotide sequence has been deposited in the GenBank data base with accession number U29679. Domains potentially involved in transactivation include: acidic (D/E), amino acids 502-572; P/S/T-rich, amino acids 641-757 and 845-903.

Sequence Comparisons-- Alignment of fish and mammalian AHRs (Fig. 4) reveal a striking dichotomy between the well conserved N-terminal half and the poorly conserved C-terminal half (termed "hypervariable" by others (28)). The sharp boundary between the two regions (residue ~406-414; see Fig. 4) corresponds closely with the C-terminal boundary of the ligand-binding domain (26, 46-48). Because of the low sequence identity among AHRs within the distal half of the protein and the resulting uncertainties in the C-terminal alignments, comparisons of the N-terminal halves of the proteins are most informative. FhAHR1 is most closely related to the mammalian AHRs in this region (70-71% identity) whereas FhAHR2 is most closely related to the tomcod AHR (74% identity) and shares less sequence identity with mammalian AHRs (60-62%) (Table I). Importantly, FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 are as different from each other in this region (61% identity) as each is from other AHR sequences (Table I).

View larger version (82K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4.   Alignment of AHR amino acid sequences. Deduced amino acid sequences of fish and mammalian AHRs were aligned using ClustalW, version 1.7 (38). Amino acids that are identical in three or more sequences are boxed and shaded. Similar amino acids are in boldface type. The basic helix loop helix region and PAS domain are indicated by lines over the appropriate domains. The ligand-binding domain (47) is in brackets. The LXCXE/MYCAD motif is indicated by a double underline. See Fig. 5 legend for GenBank accession numbers of the sequences used.

Within the conserved N-terminal region, there are three segments of high sequence identity separated by short stretches of highly variable residues (Fig. 4). The first conserved segment encompasses the basic and helix loop helix motifs identified previously in mammalian AHRs. Fundulus AHR1 and Fundulus AHR2 share 83 and 73% identity, respectively, with the human AHR in this region. Notably, both Fundulus AHRs possess the basic 1 and basic 2 domains found in mammalian AHRs (26, 49). In addition, specific basic region residues identified as essential for XRE binding of the mammalian AHR (mouse residues P³⁴SKRHR³⁹ (50)) and for nuclear localization (Arg¹²-His³⁸ (51)) are retained in both FhAHR1 and FhAHR2. The nuclear export sequence (Lys⁶²-Ser⁷² (51)) is also well conserved in both Fundulus AHRs.

The second conserved segment is the ~67 amino acid region containing the PAS-A box (residues 105-171 of FhAHR1). The third segment is the ~210 amino acid region (residues 196-409 of FhAHR1) that includes the PAS-B box as well as large flanking regions. This portion encompasses the putative ligand-binding domain of the mammalian AHRs (mouse aa 230-397 (26, 46-48)). Within this ligand-binding domain, FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 share 79 and 61% amino acid identity, respectively, with the human AHR. Previously, residue 375 of the murine AHR has been identified as a site where a A  V change results in a 4-fold decrease in binding affinity (52-54). The equivalent residues in Fundulus AHR1 and AHR2 are alanine (Ala³⁷⁶ and Ala³⁷³, respectively), as in the high affinity mouse AHR^b-1 allele. Another residue shown to be critical for AHR function, Cys²¹⁶ (55), is also conserved in FhAHR1 and FhAHR2.

Although overall sequence relatedness, conserved bHLH and PAS domains, and functional characteristics (see below) identify Fundulus AHR1 and AHR2 both as Ah receptors, there are features of the primary sequence that distinguish these two proteins. 1) An "LXCXE" motif, which has been suggested to be important for interaction of the mammalian AHR with the retinoblastoma (Rb) protein (56), is also present in Fundulus AHR1, whereas in Fundulus AHR2 the sequence "MYCAD" occurs at this location (Fig. 4). 2) The C-terminal half of the Fundulus AHR1 includes a glutamine (Gln)-rich region (Fig. 2); a similar domain has been identified in mammalian AHRs (26) and has been implicated in their transactivation function (47, 57-60). In contrast, the Gln-rich domain is reduced in Fundulus AHR2. However, other potential transactivation domains, including acidic and P/S/T-rich domains, occur in the distal halves of both FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 (see Figs. 2 and 3).

Phylogenetic Analyses-- Earlier, we inferred the relationship of these two Fundulus AHRs to other AHR sequences using partial amino acid sequences encompassing only the PAS domain (6). Phylogenetic analysis of the full-length Fundulus AHR1 and AHR2 sequences with other published full-length AHRs (Fig. 5) shows that the vertebrate AHRs fall into two distinct groups, consistent with our earlier hypothesis. In both distance and maximum parsimony analyses, Fundulus AHR1 and all mammalian AHRs form a monophyletic group (clade), while Fundulus AHR2 clusters with other recently identified fish AHRs. These distinct AHR1 and AHR2 clades are strongly supported in both analyses. F. heteroclitus is the first vertebrate species shown to possess both AHR types. The recently identified AHR homologs in Caenorhabditis elegans and Drosophila fall outside of the vertebrate AHR clusters. The topology of these and other trees resulting from phylogenetic analysis of AHR sequences (6) are consistent with a duplication of an ancestral AHR gene early in vertebrate evolution, prior to the divergence of tetrapods and ray-finned fishes.

View larger version (21K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 5.   Phylogenetic analysis of vertebrate AHR proteins and invertebrate AHR homologs. The phylogenetic tree was constructed using PAUP*4.0b1 (39) as described under "Experimental Procedures." The same topology was obtained using the Neighbor Joining approach. AHR1 and AHR2 clades are indicated. The GenBank accession numbers of the AHR sequences used are: human (L19872), rabbit (D38226), mouse (M94623), rat (U09000), Fundulus AHR1 (AF024591), trout AHR2 (AF065137), trout AHR2 (AF065138), tomcod (S1079286), zebrafish AHR2 (AF063446), Fundulus AHR2 (U29679), Drosophila (AF050630), and C. elegans (AF039570).

In Vitro Expression and Functional Characterization of FhAHR1 and FhAHR2-- The functional characteristics of the two Fundulus AHRs, including their capacity for ligand binding, was assessed following their expression in a coupled in vitro transcription and translation system. Labeling with [³⁵S]methionine demonstrated that proteins of the predicted size were synthesized in this system (Fig. 6A).

View larger version (33K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 6.   Ligand binding by Fundulus AHRs. A, in vitro transcription/translation of mouse (M), Fundulus AHR1 (F1), and Fundulus AHR2 (F2) cDNAs. pSPORTMAHR, pSPFhAHR118-942, and pDPFhAHR2 constructs were expressed in TNT SP6- and T7-Quick Coupled Reticulocyte Lysate Systems to synthesize 35S-labeled proteins. The TNT reactions were subjected to SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, followed by fluorography and autoradiography. The second, lower molecular mass band in lane F1 is likely due to either translational initiation from a downstream initiation site or transcriptional pauses during the in vitro transcription/translation reaction, as noted by others for expressed AHRs (99). B, photoaffinity labeling of Fundulus AHR1 and AHR2 proteins (pSPFhAHR118-942 and pDPFhAHR2 constructs, respectively) with the photoaffinity ligand 2-azido-3-[125I]iodo-7,8-dibromodibenzo-p-dioxin. C, specific binding of [3H]TCDD to Fundulus AHRs and human AHR as analyzed by velocity sedimentation on sucrose gradients. AHR proteins were expressed by in vitro transcription/translation (TNT) and incubated with [3H]TCDD (2 nM) ± TCDF (400 nM). Gradients were fractionated and counted. Specific binding is the difference between total binding (TCDF; solid circles) and nonspecific binding (+TCDF; open circles). [3H]TCDD concentration was verified by sampling each tube for total counts. [14C]Catalase (11.3 S) and [14C] ovalbumin (3.6 S) were added as sedimentation markers; their elution positions are indicated.

The ligand binding activities of the in vitro synthesized FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 were evaluated by photoaffinity labeling and velocity sedimentation analysis. The photoaffinity ligand 2-azido-3-[¹²⁵I]iodo-7,8-dibromodibenzo-p-dioxin specifically labeled both AHR proteins (Fig. 6B), as observed for mammalian AHRs expressed in vitro (26, 28) and in vivo (61). Ligand binding was also measured using the reversible ligand [³H]TCDD. Velocity sedimentation on sucrose gradients showed binding of [³H]TCDD (2 nM) that was displaced by a 200-fold excess of unlabeled ligand (Fig. 6C). Such specific binding was not observed with unprogrammed lysate (Fig. 6C) or in lysate programmed with an empty expression vector (not shown). The sedimentation coefficients of FhAHR1 (9.2 S) and FhAHR2 (10.6 S) were similar to those obtained with the in vitro expressed human AHR (10.7 S; Fig. 6C) and mouse AHR (9.8 S; not shown) as well as those reported for mammalian AHRs in cytosol (62, 63). The amount of specific binding obtained with the Fundulus AHRs (FhAHR1: 8 fmol/reaction; FhAHR2: 10 fmol/reaction; means of three experiments at 2 nM [³H]TCDD) was less than that obtained with mouse and human AHRs under these conditions (64 and 37 fmol/TNT reaction, respectively).

DNA Binding-- The strong sequence conservation of the DNA-binding regions of both Fundulus AHRs suggests that both of these proteins may bind canonical XRE sequences. We assessed the DNA binding ability of these proteins using electrophoretic mobility shift assays with TNT-synthesized proteins (Fig. 7). Both proteins exhibited TCDD-stimulated DNA binding in conjunction with human ARNT1. DNA binding was sequence-specific; the shifted band could be displaced by a 100-fold excess of unlabeled XRE, but not by an XRE with a point mutation in the core binding sequence (Fig. 7). Unprogrammed reticulocyte lysate did not support specific XRE binding (Fig. 7).

View larger version (63K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 7.   TCDD stimulates DNA binding by Fundulus AHRs. In vitro translated mouse or Fundulus AHR proteins (pSPORTMAHR, pSPFhAHR1, and pDPFhAHR2) were incubated with human ARNT (pSPORTARNT) and either dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) () (lanes 2, 4, and 8) or 25 nM TCDD in dimethyl sulfoxide (+) (lanes 1, 3, 5-7, and 9-11), followed by gel shift assays as described under "Experimental Procedures." Reaction in lane 1 contained unprogrammed TNT lysate in lieu of AHR protein. Reactions in lanes 6, 7, 10, and 11 contained 100-fold excess unlabeled wild-type mouse DRE (wt) or mutant DRE (mut). An arrowhead indicates the position of TCDD-stimulated shifted bands. A nonspecifically shifted band is indicated by an asterisk.

FhAHR1 exhibited some sequence-specific DNA binding in the absence of exogenous TCDD. This interaction could be reduced by pretreating the TNT lysates with dextran-coated charcoal, suggesting that this XRE binding is not ligand-independent but rather due to a ligand intrinsic to the lysate. Similar TCDD-independent DNA binding was observed with FhAHR2, but this interaction was completely abolished with charcoal treatment; thus, the putative intrinsic ligand may have a higher affinity for FhAHR1. Seemingly constitutive XRE binding by AHR·ARNT complexes in electrophoretic mobility shift assays has also been observed with mammalian AHR proteins synthesized in vitro (Fig. 7 and Refs. 25, 28, and 64) as well as with other fish AHRs (32, 33).

Tissue Distribution of Fundulus AHR1 and AHR2 mRNA-- The tissue-specific expression of FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 transcripts was measured using a semi-quantitative RT-PCR method. FhAHR1 was expressed predominantly in brain, heart, ovary, and testis; expression of this transcript was detectable but very low in liver, kidney, and gill tissues (Fig. 8). In contrast, uniform levels of FhAHR2 expression were detected in heart, liver, ovary, testis, brain, kidney, and gill of adult Fundulus.

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 8.   Tissue-specific expression of Fundulus AHRs. A, poly(A)+ RNA from Fundulus heart (H), liver (L), ovary (O), testis (not shown), brain (B), kidney (K), and gill (G) were reverse transcribed with random primers. An equal aliquot of cDNA was used in each of three PCR reactions for amplification of Fundulus AHR1, AHR2, and actin fragments. The PCR conditions were adjusted so that the amount of PCR product obtained was linearly related to the amount of template and the number of PCR cycles. Specificity for the target gene was demonstrated in control experiments (not shown). An aliquot of each PCR sample was subjected to agarose gel electrophoresis followed by ethidium bromide staining. B, the integrated density of each amplified fragment was determined from the digital image of the gels in A and plotted as a percentage of that of actin in the same tissue. Similar results were obtained when this experiment was repeated with a second independent reverse transcription reaction for each tissue (data not shown).

	DISCUSSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

We describe here the presence of two highly divergent forms of AHR in a single vertebrate species, the teleost F. heteroclitus. These data provide the first molecular evidence for an AHR paralog group like those known for other bHLH-PAS proteins, and define a novel subfamily of ligand-binding bHLH-PAS proteins.

Fundulus AHR1 and AHR2 Are Both Homologs of the Mammalian AHR-- Fundulus AHR1 and AHR2 share only 40% amino acid sequence identity overall (61% in the N-terminal half), but they each possess the essential features that define the original AHR (1, 26). Our conclusion that both of these killifish genes are homologs of the mammalian AHR, rather than of other members of the PAS family, is based on several criteria.

(a) Both Fundulus AHRs share significant sequence identity with mammalian AHRs and are more closely related to these AHRs than to any other known PAS protein. In phylogenetic analyses of all PAS protein sequences, the fish and mammalian AHR sequences cluster together in a monophyletic group of vertebrate AHRs that is strongly supported by statistical analysis (6). Importantly, this clade containing FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 falls within the larger AHR gene family that also includes the invertebrate AHR homologs recently identified in C. elegans and Drosophila (6, 65, 66). This placement within the larger AHR family supports our designation of both Fundulus proteins as AHRs.

(b) Like mammalian AHRs, both killifish AHRs possess a PAS domain and a bHLH motif (as defined by Burbach et al. (26)). Among bHLH proteins, the bHLH domain of the mammalian AHR is distinctive (49, 67). The bHLH domains of the Fundulus AHR proteins share high amino acid identity with those of mammalian AHRs (Fundulus AHR1, 83% identity; Fundulus AHR2, 73% identity; Fig. 4). Moreover, the bHLH domains of both FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 exhibit 100% conservation of the specific residues that have been shown to be essential for XRE binding of the mammalian AHR (P³⁴SKRHR³⁹) (50).

(c) Both Fundulus AHR1 and Fundulus AHR2 exhibit specific, high-affinity binding of dioxins as assessed by photoaffinity labeling and velocity sedimentation analysis (Fig. 6). Mammalian AHRs exhibit a similar dioxin binding ability (26, 28). In contrast, an invertebrate (C. elegans) AHR homolog does not appear to bind dioxins (65). Thus, the ability to bind halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons may be a unique characteristic of vertebrate AHRs.

(d) Both Fundulus AHRs exhibit sequence-specific binding to mouse XRE oligonucleotides in a gel shift assay (Fig. 7). For both proteins, XRE binding is ARNT-dependent and is enhanced by ligand (TCDD), as for mammalian AHRs.

(e) Several splice junctions have been identified from analysis of genomic clones containing portions of the FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 genes (Figs. 2 and 3). These data indicate that the gene structures of FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 are similar to each other and to that of the mouse AHR gene (45).³

Fundulus AHR1 and AHR2 Exhibit Differences Suggesting Distinct Functions-- Although both Fundulus AHR1 and AHR2 are bona fide AHRs by the criteria noted above, these two proteins differ in several ways. At the level of primary sequence, they share only a modest degree of amino acid identity. They also differ in the presence of specific motifs. The presence of a Gln-rich region in FhAHR1 is consistent with our designation of this form as the direct ortholog of mammalian AHRs, in which Gln-rich regions occur. The reduced Gln-rich region in FhAHR2 is a characteristic shared by other fish AHRs cloned to date (31-33). However, FhAHR2 contains other motifs (acidic and P/S/T-rich domains) known to participate in transactivation. The presence of an LXCXE motif also unites Fundulus AHR1 with the mammalian AHRs (56). Interestingly, the MYCAD motif in this location is shared by Fundulus AHR2 and the other fish AHRs (Fig. 4; others not shown). This difference between AHR1 and AHR2 suggests that the two AHR forms may differ in their ability to interact with the Rb gene product or related proteins.

Within the putative ligand-binding domain (corresponding to amino acids 230-397 of the mouse AHR), FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 share 61% amino acid identity; they share 79 and 61% amino acid identity, respectively, with the human AHR. Although amino acids outside of this region may also contribute to the ligand binding specificity, the degree of difference in sequences within the ligand-binding domain suggests that these AHRs, and especially FhAHR2, may bind distinct ligands. This is supported by preliminary data from a yeast expression system, where FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 were differentially activated by BNF and other agonists of the mammalian AHR.⁴

The observed differences in tissue-specific expression further suggest that FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 have distinct functions. The ubiquitous expression pattern of Fundulus AHR2 is similar to that of mammalian AHRs (68-70). In contrast, the expression of Fundulus AHR1 transcripts was restricted to heart, brain, ovary, and testis, suggesting specialized roles in these tissues. These could include roles in cardiovascular or reproductive function, processes known to be altered by AHR ligands (71, 72).

Multiple AHRs in Vertebrate Animals-- Multiple forms (paralogs) are known for most other vertebrate bHLH-PAS proteins, including ARNT (64), SIM (73, 74), HIF (75, 76), Per (77), and others (reviewed in Ref. 5). It is somewhat surprising, therefore, that additional AHR forms have not been found previously in mammals or other vertebrate animals. Our results show that additional AHR forms (AHR paralogs) do occur in vertebrates. In naming the two Fundulus AHRs, we have followed the precedent set for these other paralog groups. Fundulus AHR1 shows greater similarity to the original mammalian AHR, both in terms of overall amino acid identity as well as the presence of specific motifs. Fundulus AHR2 is more divergent from the mammalian AHRs.

Interestingly, all of the full-length fish AHR sequences reported to date are significantly more similar to Fundulus AHR2 than to either Fundulus AHR1 or the mammalian AHRs (Fig. 5). Thus, the tomcod AHR (31), zebrafish AHR (32), and two recently duplicated trout AHRs ( and ) (33) should all be classified as AHR2 forms. In addition, partial AHR sequences from European flounder (78) and Poeciliopsis (5) also belong to the AHR2 clade. The two trout AHRs share 97% amino acid sequence identity, reflecting the recent tetraploid ancestry of salmonid fishes (79) and clearly distinguishing them from the highly divergent Fundulus AHRs described here. In trout and zebrafish, there is preliminary evidence for an additional AHR form that may correspond to Fundulus AHR1 (33, 80). Thus, many fish species possess two or more distinct AHRs, further supporting the existence of an AHR paralog group.

We envision two possible scenarios for the origin of the AHR1 and AHR2 clades (Fig. 9). In scenario 1, the gene duplication that produced the direct ancestors of the two Fundulus AHRs occurred after the divergence of lineages leading to present day bony fish and mammals. If this scenario is correct, one would expect (a) that the two fish AHRs would be more closely related to each other and more distantly (and similarly) related to the mammalian AHR, and (b) that AHR2 orthologs would not exist outside of bony fish (or a subset of bony fish). In scenario 2, the AHR gene duplication occurred prior to the divergence of fish and mammalian lineages. In this case, two AHRs would be expected in other vertebrate species, and the second mammalian AHR either has been lost or has yet to be discovered. This scenario predicts that one of the two fish AHRs would be more closely related than the other to the known mammalian AHR. Our current and previous (6) findings contradict both predictions of scenario 1, but are entirely consistent with those of scenario 2. Both pairwise sequence analysis and more rigorous phylogenetic analyses indicate that (i) Fundulus AHR1 is substantially more closely related to the mammalian AHRs than is AHR2, and (ii) FhAHR2 is as different from FhAHR1 as it is from the mammalian AHRs (Fig. 5 and Table I). Furthermore, we have identified both AHR1 and AHR2 orthologs in a cartilaginous fish, the dogfish Mustelus canis (6). If cartilaginous fish diverged from the main vertebrate lineage prior to the divergence of bony fish and mammalian lines, as commonly accepted (81),⁵ both AHR1 and AHR2 must have been present in a mammalian ancestor (scenario 2).

View larger version (27K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 9.   Two possible scenarios for duplication of the AHR gene in vertebrate evolution. See text for discussion.

Two rounds of genome duplications are proposed to have occurred early in vertebrate evolution, prior to the emergence of jawed vertebrates (82). Several recent studies have provided evidence that fish (especially zebrafish) contain additional members of some multigene families as compared with mammals (83). Based on these findings, it has been suggested that another genome duplication occurred in many or all fish lineages following the divergence of fish and mammalian lines (reviewed in Refs. 84 and 85). Evidence for four clusters of Hox genes in Fundulus (19), as in mammals (82), does not support such an additional duplication in an ancestor of this species. Furthermore, the existence of AHR2 orthologs in cartilaginous fish (see above) is inconsistent with AHR1 and AHR2 being the result of a duplication unique to bony fishes. Thus, we conclude that the gene or genome duplication that gave rise to AHR1 and AHR2 occurred prior to the emergence of the extant classes of jawed vertebrates.

AHR2 Ortholog in Mammals?-- If AHR1 and AHR2 arose early in vertebrate evolution, is there any evidence for a mammalian AHR2? A single AHR gene has been cloned from each of several mammalian species (human, mouse (several alleles), rat, and rabbit) (26-30). Data from AHR-null mice indicating that this AHR gene is necessary for CYP1A induction and TCDD toxicity (10, 11, 86) do not preclude the existence of a second AHR that could be involved in other aspects of dioxin signaling or in modulating AHR1 function. There is biochemical evidence for multiple forms of the AHR in mammals (87-90); these may or may not represent products of multiple AHR genes. Thus, the presence of a second AHR in mammals remains uncertain.

A novel mouse AHR-like sequence originally designated "AHR2" (91) has been characterized and renamed "AHR repressor" (92). Although most closely related to mammalian AHRs, this protein contains a highly divergent PAS-B domain and may not bind dioxins or other AHR ligands. In preliminary phylogenetic analyses, AHR repressor falls outside of the AHR1 and AHR2 clades, but within the larger vertebrate/invertebrate AHR family.⁶ We conclude from this that AHR repressor is not the mammalian ortholog of fish AHR2.

In preliminary attempts to identify a human AHR2, we have screened a panel of cDNAs from adult human tissues using degenerate primers that amplify both AHR1 and AHR2 in fish.² Evaluation of multiple clones (10-12 for each tissue) derived from RT-PCR products from human liver, lung, heart, small intestine, and placenta failed to reveal any sequences other than the human AHR identified earlier (28). These results suggest that a human AHR2, if present, is expressed at low levels or in a cell-specific or developmentally restricted manner.

Implications of a Second AHR Form in Fish-- Further investigation of the AHR2 subfamily will contribute to our understanding of AHR-dependent signaling in vertebrates, including mammals. The multiple functions ascribed to the mammalian "AHR" (2, 3) could involve multiple AHR forms or pleiotropic effects of a single AHR. If humans (mammals) possess a single AHR, it is conceivable that its multiple roles, in adaptive response pathways versus endogenous pathways (2), for example, may be partitioned among the two fish AHRs. If so, future studies in Fundulus and other teleosts could reveal AHR functions not tractable in mammals. Alternatively, fish AHRs could have evolved novel physiological functions.

Characterization of fish AHRs may illuminate the evolution of AHR ligand-binding properties. An invertebrate (C. elegans) AHR homolog lacks dioxin binding activity (65) and a similar property has been suggested for the AHR in an early diverging fish, the lamprey Petromyzon (6, 93). Other data suggest that AHR1 and AHR2 possess distinct, although overlapping, binding specificities.⁴ Further analysis of structure binding characteristics for FhAHR1 and FhAHR2 in comparison to those of other vertebrate AHRs will enhance our understanding of the evolution of dioxin signaling.

Finally, the presence of two AHRs in Fundulus and other teleosts is important for the use of fish as models in biology and toxicology. Some fish species, including Fundulus,⁷ are among the most sensitive vertebrates to dioxin toxicity (94). In addition, populations of Fundulus and other fish are capable of developing heritable dioxin resistance (16-18). These and other features have led to the proposed use of fish as vertebrate models for studying mechanisms of dioxin action (5, 32, 95). The presence of two AHRs could contribute to the sensitivity of fish to AHR agonists, and alterations in one or both of these could underlie the acquired resistance. More generally, differences in dioxin sensitivity and structure-activity relationships among taxa (96, 97) could involve differences in AHR structure, function, and multiplicity. The identification of a second AHR subfamily provides a foundation on which to investigate mechanisms of differential dioxin sensitivity among populations, species, and classes of vertebrates.

	ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are grateful to Dr. Christopher Bradfield for plasmids and assistance with the photoaffinity labeling, Drs. Dennis Powers and Doug Crawford for Fundulus genomic DNA libraries, Dr. Mitch Sogin for actin primers and generous assistance with the automated sequencer (supported by National Science Foundation Grant BIR-9419673), Susan Bello for the synthesis of methylated [methyl-¹⁴C]catalase, and several colleagues for helpful comments on the manuscript.

	FOOTNOTES

^* This work was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grants ES06272 (to M. E. H.), F32 ES05644 (to S. I. K.), and F32 ES05800 (to W. H. P.), and Superfund Basic Research Program at Boston University Grant P42 ES07381. This is contribution 9985 from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

The nucleotide sequences reported in this paper have been deposited in the GenBank database under GenBank accession numbers AF024591 (FhAHR1), AF190654 (FhAHR1), and U29679 (FhAHR2).

To whom correspondence should be addressed: Biology Department, MS #32, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543-1049. Tel.: 508-289-3242; Fax: 508-457-2134; E-mail: mhahn@whoi.edu.

² S. Karchner, W. Powell, and M. Hahn, unpublished data.

³ S. Karchner and M. Hahn, unpublished data.

⁴ L. Poellinger, S. Karchner, and M. Hahn, manuscript in preparation.

⁵ The basal position of cartilaginous fish in the evolution of jawed vertebrates has been questioned recently (98), but most morphological and molecular evidence remains in favor of the traditional view.

⁶ M. E. Hahn, unpublished analyses.

⁷ B. Toomey, S. Bello, M. Hahn, S. Cantrell, P. Wright, D. Tillitt, and R. DiGiulio, manuscript in preparation.

	ABBREVIATIONS

The abbreviations used are: AHR, Ah receptor; ARNT, AHR nuclear translocator; bHLH, basic helix loop helix; CYP1A1, cytochrome P450-1A1; PAS, Per-ARNT-Sim; RT-PCR, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction; RACE, rapid amplification of cDNA ends; TCDD, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin; XRE, xenobiotic response element; bp, base pair(s); UTR, untranslated region; MOPS, 4-morpholinepropanesulfonic acid.

	REFERENCES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. M. Billiard, J. N. Meyer, D. M. Wassenberg, P. V. Hodson, and R. T. Di Giulio Nonadditive effects of PAHs on Early Vertebrate Development: mechanisms and implications for risk assessment Toxicol. Sci., September 1, 2008; 105(1): 5 - 23. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Yasui, E.-Y. Kim, H. Iwata, D. G. Franks, S. I. Karchner, M. E. Hahn, and S. Tanabe Functional Characterization and Evolutionary History of Two Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Isoforms (AhR1 and AhR2) from Avian Species Toxicol. Sci., September 1, 2007; 99(1): 101 - 117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Cohen, J. Tirindelli, M. Gomez-Chiarri, and D. Nacci Functional implications of Major Histocompatibility (MH) variation using estuarine fish populations Integr. Comp. Biol., December 1, 2006; 46(6): 1016 - 1029. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Wang, B. E. Scheffler, and K. L. Willett CYP1C1 Messenger RNA Expression is Inducible by Benzo[a]pyrene in Fundulus heteroclitus Embryos and Adults Toxicol. Sci., October 1, 2006; 93(2): 331 - 340. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. M. Billiard, A. R. Timme-Laragy, D. M. Wassenberg, C. Cockman, and R. T. Di Giulio The Role of the Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Pathway in Mediating Synergistic Developmental Toxicity of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons to Zebrafish Toxicol. Sci., August 1, 2006; 92(2): 526 - 536. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. I. Karchner, D. G. Franks, S. W. Kennedy, and M. E. Hahn The molecular basis for differential dioxin sensitivity in birds: Role of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor PNAS, April 18, 2006; 103(16): 6252 - 6257. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Lavine, A. J. Rowatt, T. Klimova, A. J. Whitington, E. Dengler, C. Beck, and W. H. Powell Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptors in the Frog Xenopus laevis: Two AhR1 Paralogs Exhibit Low Affinity for 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin (TCDD) Toxicol. Sci., November 1, 2005; 88(1): 60 - 72. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. L. Prasch, H. Teraoka, S. A. Carney, W. Dong, T. Hiraga, J. J. Stegeman, W. Heideman, and R. E. Peterson Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor 2 Mediates 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Developmental Toxicity in Zebrafish Toxicol. Sci., November 1, 2003; 76(1): 138 - 150. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Song, M. Clagett-Dame, R. E. Peterson, M. E. Hahn, W. M. Westler, R. R. Sicinski, and H. F. DeLuca A ligand for the aryl hydrocarbon receptor isolated from lung PNAS, November 12, 2002; 99(23): 14694 - 14699. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. A. Andreasen, M. E. Hahn, W. Heideman, R. E. Peterson, and R. L. Tanguay The Zebrafish (Danio rerio) Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Type 1 Is a Novel Vertebrate Receptor Mol. Pharmacol., August 1, 2002; 62(2): 234 - 249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. N. Meyer, D. E. Nacci, and R. T. Di Giulio Cytochrome P4501A (CYP1A) in Killifish (Fundulus heteroclitus): Heritability of Altered Expression and Relationship to Survival in Contaminated Sediments Toxicol. Sci., July 1, 2002; 68(1): 69 - 81. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. A. Andreasen, R. L. Tanguay, R. E. Peterson, and W. Heideman Identification of a Critical Amino Acid in the Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor J. Biol. Chem., April 5, 2002; 277(15): 13210 - 13218. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. J. Kolell and D. L. Crawford Evolution of Sp Transcription Factors Mol. Biol. Evol., March 1, 2002; 19(3): 216 - 222. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. I. Karchner, D. G. Franks, W. H. Powell, and M. E. Hahn Regulatory Interactions among Three Members of the Vertebrate Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Family: AHR Repressor, AHR1, and AHR2 J. Biol. Chem., February 22, 2002; 277(9): 6949 - 6959. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. A. Jensen and M. E. Hahn cDNA Cloning and Characterization of a High Affinity Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor in a Cetacean, the Beluga, Delphinapterus leucas Toxicol. Sci., November 1, 2001; 64(1): 41 - 56. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. M. Bello, D. G. Franks, J. J. Stegeman, and M. E. Hahn Acquired Resistance to Ah Receptor Agonists in a Population of Atlantic Killifish (Fundulus heteroclitus) Inhabiting a Marine Superfund Site: In Vivo and in Vitro Studies on the Inducibility of Xenobiotic Metabolizing Enzymes Toxicol. Sci., March 1, 2001; 60(1): 77 - 91. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. H. Powell, R. Bright, S. M. Bello, and M. E. Hahn Developmental and Tissue-Specific Expression of AHR1, AHR2, and ARNT2 in Dioxin-Sensitive and -Resistant Populations of the Marine Fish Fundulus heteroclitus Toxicol. Sci., October 1, 2000; 57(2): 229 - 239. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. R. Bell and A. Poland Binding of Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor (AhR) to AhR-interacting Protein. THE ROLE OF hsp90 J. Biol. Chem., November 10, 2000; 275(46): 36407 - 36414. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Submit a Letter to Editor Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Karchner, S. I. Articles by Hahn, M. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Karchner, S. I. Articles by Hahn, M. E. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?