Advertisement
JBC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M611446200 on March 2, 2007

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 282, Issue 17, 12590-12597, April 27, 2007
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
282/17/12590    most recent
M611446200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McMillan, B. J.
Right arrow Articles by Bradfield, C. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McMillan, B. J.
Right arrow Articles by Bradfield, C. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Induces Premature Activation of the KLF2 Regulon during Thymocyte Development*Formula

Brian J. McMillan, Susanne N. McMillan, Ed Glover, and Christopher A. Bradfield1

From the McArdle Laboratory for Cancer Research, University of Wisconsin Medical School, Madison, Wisconsin 53706

Received for publication, December 14, 2006


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
The environmental pollutant 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD, dioxin) causes numerous and diverse toxic events via activation of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor, including atrophy of the thymus. Exposure to TCDD induces acute thymocyte cell loss, which occurs concomitantly with proliferation arrest and premature emigration of triple negative (TN; CD4-, CD8-, CD3-) T cell progenitors. In this report, we demonstrate that TCDD exposure results in dysregulation of KLF2 (Kruppel-like factor 2) expression in developing thymocytes. The Klf2 gene encodes an Sp1-like zinc finger transcription factor that functions as a central regulator of T lymphocyte proliferation and trafficking. During normal thymocyte development, KLF2 is expressed exclusively in CD4 and CD8 single positive T cells and promotes a nonproliferative, promigratory phenotype. In mice exposed to TCDD, however, the Klf2 gene is prematurely expressed in TN thymocytes. Administration of a 100 µg/kg dose of TCDD results in a ~15-fold induction of KLF2 as early as the TN2 (CD44+, CD25+) stage of development and immediately precedes acute cell loss in the TN3, TN4, and double positive (CD4+, CD8+) cell stages. Induction of KLF2 occurs within 12 h of TCDD exposure and is fully dependent on expression of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor. In addition, TCDD exposure alters the expression of several factors comprising the KLF2 regulon, including Edg1/S1P1, beta7 integrin, CD52, Cdkn2d (cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2D), s100a4, and IL10R{alpha}. These findings indicate that the pollutant TCDD interferes with early thymopoeisis via ectopic expression of the KLF2 regulon.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)2 is the most toxic congener of a family of halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons produced by common industrial processes (1). Exposure to TCDD induces thymic atrophy, immune suppression, hepatocellular carcinoma, cleft palate, chloracne, hepatomegaly, cachexia, and several other diverse toxic end points (1, 2). Extensive pharmacological and genetic research has demonstrated that TCDD toxicity is mediated through activation of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR or Ah receptor), a ligand-activated member of the PAS (Per-ARNT-Sim) family of environmental sensors (3–6). Due to widespread human and animal exposure to environmental agonists of the AHR (1), these compounds pose a serious threat to public health. In the current study, we investigate how exogenous activation of the AHR provokes atrophy of the thymus.

The thymus is the primary source of the T cell repertoire and thus a critical part of the adaptive immune system. Within this organ, T cell development occurs in a series of highly regulated differentiation events (7). At the beginning of this developmental process, the thymus is seeded with pluripotent bone marrow progenitors. Interactions with resident stromal cells then induce T lineage commitment and V(D)J rearrangement of the genes encoding the {alpha} and beta chains of the T cell receptor (TCR) (7). Several surface markers are coordinately regulated during this developmental process and are commonly used to represent specific stages of thymopoeisis (see Fig. 1A). The earliest progenitors within the thymus are negative for the mature surface markers CD4, CD8, and CD3 (8). These "triple negative" (TN) cells can be further categorized into four ordered developmental stages during which the TCRbeta gene is rearranged and then expressed at the cell surface: TN1 (CD44+, CD25-) -> TN2 (CD44+, CD25+) -> TN3 (CD44-, CD25+) -> TN4 (CD44-, CD25-) (8). If TCRbeta rearrangement is successful, thymocytes then initiate recombination of TCR{alpha} as well as CD4 and CD8 expression (7). Although "double positive" (DP; CD4+, CD8+) cells comprise ~80% of all thymocytes, the vast majority of these cells fail to generate an appropriate TCR{alpha}beta signaling complex (7). Only cells that pass both positive and negative TCR selection are released into the bloodstream as CD4 helper or CD8 cytotoxic single positive (SP) T cells.

The process of TN development is highly sensitive to TCDD. Exposure to this environmental pollutant results in proliferation arrest of the TN3 and TN4 stages of development (9), as well as premature emigration of TN3-like thymocytes (10). Several lines of evidence suggest that these TN defects are due to cell autonomous changes in gene transcription. Prior research has demonstrated that thymocyte, but not stromal, expression of the AHR signaling pathway is required for TCDD-induced atrophy (9, 11, 12). Moreover, mutant constructs of the Ah receptor have demonstrated that AHR/DNA interactions are required for thymic toxicity (13). Overall, these results are consistent with the idea that TCDD dysregulates TN expression of a gene, or genes, with a critical role in thymocyte proliferation and/or emigration.

In this report, we demonstrate that TCDD triggers misexpression of the KLF2 (Kruppel-like factor 2) regulon in an AHR-dependent manner. During normal thymocyte development, KLF2 is expressed exclusively in the mature SP populations and enforces (i) egress to the peripheral lymphoid organs and (ii) peripheral T cell quiescence (14–19). Here, we show that the environmental contaminant TCDD induces ectopic expression of the KLF2 transcription factor and its associated regulon during TN thymopoeisis.


   EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Mice—"Wild-type" C57BL/6 and Rag-1tm1Mom (Rag-1 null) mice (20) were obtained from the Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, ME). AHR null mice (21) were obtained from a colony maintained at the University of Wisconsin (Madison, WI). The AHR and Rag-1 null lines were backcrossed to the C57BL/6 genotype for at least 10 generations. Animals were housed in a selective pathogen-free environment and supplied with food and water ad libitum, according to the rules and guidelines of the University of Wisconsin.

TCDD Treatment—5–7-week-old males were injected once intraperitoneally with 100 µg/kg body weight TCDD. Me2SO was used as vehicle control at a dose of 1.25 ml/kg body weight. Animals from age-matched litters were used for each experiment.

Thymocyte Preparation—Each thymus was homogenized by gentle grinding in low glucose Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 5% fetal bovine serum (Invitrogen) and passage through a 20-gauge needle. Red blood cells were lysed in ammonium chloride buffer (0.17 M NH4Cl, 10 mM KHCO3, and 1 mM EDTA, pH 7.4) for 5 min on ice. Thymocyte samples were then pelleted and resuspended in phosphate-buffered saline supplemented with 0.5% (w/v) bovine serum albumin and 0.1% (w/v) sodium azide (both from Sigma).

Cell Counting—Thymus cell count was determined using a BD Biosciences FACSCalibur flow cytometer (Franklin Lakes, NJ). Each thymocyte sample was acquired for 15 s at a 0.2 µl/s flow rate, gated based on forward and side scatter, and then enumerated.

Antibodies—The following monoclonal antibodies were purchased from Ebioscience (San Diego, CA) or Pharmingen (Franklin Lakes, NJ) and used at a saturating concentration: fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-conjugated CD4 (clone GK1.5; Ebioscience) and CD44 (IM7; Ebioscience); PE-conjugated CD8{alpha} (53-6.7; Pharmingen) and CD25 (3C7; Pharmingen); PE-Cy5-conjugated CD3{epsilon} (145-2C11; Pharmingen) and beta7 integrin (FIB504; Pharmingen); APC-conjugated CD3{epsilon} (145-2C11; Ebioscience), CD11beta (M1/70; Ebioscience), CD8{alpha} (53-6.7; Ebioscience), CD4 (RM4-5; Ebioscience).

Flow Cytometry—Thymocytes were incubated in staining buffer (phosphate-buffered saline plus 0.5% bovine serum albumin and 0.1% NaN3) with the appropriate antibodies for 30 min at 4 °C. Each thymocyte sample was stained using two independent antibody mixtures. The CD4/CD8 double positive and single positive cells were analyzed using fluorescein isothiocyanate-CD4 and PE-CD8 antibodies. Triple negative cells were analyzed using fluorescein isothiocyanate-CD44, PE-CD8, PE-Cy5 or APC-CD3{epsilon}, APC-CD8{alpha}, APC-CD4, APC-CD45R, and APC-CD11beta antibodies. All cells negative for CD4/8/3/11beta/CD45R staining were used for triple negative gating based on CD44 and CD25 expression. After antibody incubation, each sample was washed once with staining buffer and resuspended in staining buffer plus 1% (w/v) formaldehyde. Data were acquired using a FACSCalibur cytometer after calibrating for fluorescence channel overlap using the appropriate staining controls. Quantitation analysis was completed on BD Biosciences Cellquest software. The flow cytometry figures used in this publication were created using WinMDI 2.8 (Scripps Institute, La Jolla, CA) or FloJo (Ashland, OR) software.

RNA Isolation and qRT-PCR—Unfixed cells were sorted at 4 °C using a BD Biosciences FacsVantage SE flow cytometer. Sorting accuracy was determined to be greater than 98% in each experiment. Total RNA was isolated from each cell sample using RNeasy kits with DNase treatment (Qiagen, Valencia, CA). Quantitect RT-PCR kits (Qiagen) were then used for combined reverse transcription and amplification of samples with gene-specific primers (IDT (Coralville, IA) and Applied Biosystems (Foster City, CA)). At least three replicate reactions were assayed for each sample using the ABI Prism 7900 system (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). Equal amounts of total RNA were added to each well as measured by the 2100 Bioanalyzer (Agilent, Foster City, CA); RNA loading was further normalized to endogenous levels of hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyl transferase. -Fold change was calculated as 2({Delta}CT). RT-PCR primers are provided in the supplemental materials.

Microarray Profiling—Total RNA (~100 ng) was isolated from TN2/TNX (CD44int, CD25high/int) cells, which were sorted from a pool of Rag-1 null mice treated with TCDD or Me2SO for 48 h (n = 8 for each treatment). Microarray comparisons were performed by the Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation (San Diego, CA), as previously described (see Refs. 22 and 23 and references therein). Briefly, each RNA was split into duplicate samples, linearly amplified, and then hybridized to GeneAtlas GNF1M high density oligonucleotide arrays (22, 23). Fluorescence values were normalized by global median scaling. Experimental variations due to differences in RNA amplification or hybridization were assessed using a two-tailed t test between each microarray data set. Expression changes with a p value greater than 0.05 were discarded.

Statistics—The analysis of beta7 integrin expression (Fig. 4B) was performed using a two-tailed t test. Time course data (Fig. 2) were analyzed using a two-way analysis of variance with a Bonferroni posttest for differences between treatment groups.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Exposure to TCDD Disrupts TN2 Thymopoeisis—The overarching goal of this study was to elucidate how TCDD interferes with mammalian thymopoeisis. Toward this end, we first set out to identify which stages of thymocyte development were subject to overt TCDD toxicity. As an initial step, all thymocytes were classified into developmental stages based upon surface expression of CD3, CD4, CD8, CD25, and CD44 (see Fig. 1A). Unexpectedly, we observed that TCDD dramatically altered the canonical pattern of CD44/CD25 expression. Treatment with TCDD consistently induced a novel TN phenotype, which was intermediate in both CD44 and CD25 expression (CD44int, CD25int) (Fig. 1B, boxed region). Due to its unknown relationship to classical thymocyte development, we named this population triple negative X (TNX). In addition to TNX formation, we observed a subtle loss of the late TN2 (CD44int, CD25high) phenotype in mice treated with TCDD (Fig. 1B, arrowhead; note the concave pattern of CD25 expression during TN2 to TN3 development in TCDD-treated mice).


Figure 1
View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 1.
TCDD induces a novel TN phenotype, TNX, via a decrease of CD25 surface expression in late TN2 stage cells. A, hematopoietic precursor cells undergo a series of regulated differentiation steps in the thymus in order to produce mature peripheral lymphocytes. Cells within the thymus can be classified into specific developmental stages based upon the surface expression of several developmentally regulated proteins. B, C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) were treated with TCDD or Me2SO and analyzed as described under "Experimental Procedures." Top and bottom, representative dot and contour plots, respectively, of CD44/CD25 staining from each treatment group. A novel cell population, TNX (boxed region; CD44int, CD25int) was observed after TCDD exposure. A loss of CD44int TN2 stage cells (arrowhead) was also observed. Note the concave pattern of CD25 expression during TN2 to TN3 development in TCDD-treated mice. C, Rag-1tm1Mom mice, which have a development block at the TN3 stage, were treated with TCDD or Me2SO (DMSO) for 24 h (n = 5). Thymocytes were pooled from each treatment group and analyzed via flow cytometry. Data are presented as zebra-style contour plots.

 
We hypothesized that the TN2 and TNX phenotypes were related phenomena (i.e. TN2 stage cells (CD44int, CD25high) were diverted to the TNX phenotype (CD44int, CD25int) by TCDD exposure. To test this hypothesis, we treated Rag-1 null mice, which have a profound developmental block at the TN3 stage of development (20), for 24 h with TCDD or Me2SO. We observed that TCDD treatment markedly attenuated surface expression of CD25 in TN2 stage cells (Fig. 1C). The geometric mean of CD25 expression in control and TCDD-treated TN2 cells was 11,804 and 5028 units, respectively. These results were consistent with the idea that TNX phenotype cells are a TCDD-induced derivative of the late TN2 (CD44int, CD25high) stage of development.

We next set out to determine the relationship between TNX formation and TCDD-induced thymic cell loss. Toward this end, we first determined total thymus cellularity over a time course of TCDD exposure. We found that thymocyte cell number was significantly decreased within 72 h in TCDD treated animals; a ~90% loss of control cell number was observed by 7 days (Fig. 2A). We then asked if cell loss occurred across all thymocyte populations or was specific to select developmental stages. In order to accurately enumerate each population, we designed our fluorescence gating to exclude TNX cells from all other TN populations (Fig. 2B). We then calculated the relative number of cells in each developmental stage by multiplying the percentage of cells in each stage by the previously determined total thymus cell count. Using this method, we observed that TCDD does not significantly affect the cellularity of the TN1 and early TN2 (CD44high) stages of development (Fig. 2C). The cell populations developmentally subsequent to the TN2/TNX stage, however, were significantly reduced in cell number. The TN3, TN4, and DP cell populations each exhibited acute cell loss within 48 h of TCDD exposure.

In order to elucidate the molecular events that lead to cell loss, we set out to determine the transcriptional profile of the late TN2 (CD44int) population in both its normal and TCDD-exposed states. To obtain enough RNA for microarray analysis, we sorted TN2/TNX cells from a pool of mice, which were treated with TCDD or Me2SO for 48 h (n = 8 for each treatment). The Rag-1 null genotype was utilized for these experiments due to fluorescence overlap between the TNX and TN4 population, which is present in wild type but not Rag-1 null mice. Total RNA was isolated from each cell population and used to determine global gene expression using high density oligonucleotide microarrays (22, 23). Treatment with TCDD was found to alter the expression of ~2000 genes greater than 1.5-fold and ~350 genes greater than 5-fold in each of two arrays. The top 20 up- and down-regulated expression changes are presented in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. The entire data set is available as supplemental material.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 1
Top 20 genes up-regulated by TCDD in the TN2/TNX cell population TN2/TNX cells were sorted from a pool of Rag-1 null mice treated with TCDD or Me2SO for 48 h (n = 8 for each treatment). Global gene expression was determined by hybridization to high density oligonucleotide microarrays in duplicate. Each data point represents the fluorescence value at the designated probe location following chip-to-chip normalization.

 


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 2
Top 20 genes down-regulated by TCDD in the TN2/TNX cell population

 
TCDD Induces Ectopic Expression of KLF2—The data set of genes that were most highly altered by TCDD exposure was mined for central regulators of T cell biology. We found that KLF2, a master regulator of T cell activation and trafficking (15–19), was induced >13-fold in TCDD-treated cells (Table 1). In order to verify induction of KLF2, we sorted an independent sample of TN2/TNX cells from Rag-1 null mice, which were treated with TCDD or Me2SO for 12 h. Quantitative RT-PCR was then used to measure mRNA expression of KLF2 as well as several genes previously shown to be TCDD-inducible in the thymus, such as Cyp1b1, Scinderin, and Lgals3 (24, 25). Using qRT-PCR, we confirmed a robust increase (>5-fold) in each of these mRNA transcripts in response to TCDD, including a 15-fold increase of KLF2 (Fig. 3A). Next, we utilized AHR null mice to determine if the KLF2 response to TCDD was mediated by the AHR and independent of the Rag-1 null genotype. Toward this end, we isolated TN3 stage cells from a pool of C57BL/6 or AHR null mice treated with TCDD or Me2SO for 24 h. The levels of KLF2 and Cyp1b1 mRNA in each treatment group were then measured via qRT-PCR. The Ahr+/+ cell population exhibited a >19-fold increase in both KLF2 and Cyp1b1 mRNA in response to TCDD (Fig. 3B). The cells isolated from AHR null mice, however, did not exhibit induction of either mRNA following TCDD treatment (Fig. 3B).


Figure 2
View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 2.
Exposure to TCDD induces acute, early cell loss in the TN3, TN4, and DP cell stages. C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) were treated with TCDD or Me2SO over a 7-day time course. A, the number of cells in each thymus was determined using a flow cytometer at constant flow rate as described under "Experimental Procedures." B, the percentage of cells in each developmental stage was determined by fluorescent gating. The gating used to analyze the TN populations was specifically designed to exclude the novel TNX population. DMSO, Me2SO. C, the relative number of cells in each developmental stage was calculated by multiplying the total thymocyte count (shown in A) by the percentage of cells in each fluorescent gate (shown in B). All data are presented as the mean ± S.D. *, p < 0.05; ***, p < 0.001.

 
TCDD Induces Misexpression of the KLF2 Regulon—The KLF2 protein is a member of the Sp1 family of transcription factors and a promiscuous regulator of gene expression (26). Due to the observed level of KLF2 induction, we reasoned that genes regulated by KLF2 might also be significantly altered by TCDD exposure. In order to test this hypothesis, we surveyed the literature for genes which have been shown to be highly altered (>2.5-fold) by KLF2 overexpression (19) or deficiency (18) in T lineage cells. We then examined the expression of these genes in our microarray data set. Using this approach, we identified several members of the KLF2 regulon as putative TCDD-inducible genes (Table 3).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 3
Exposure to TCDD alters expression of the KLF2 regulon The literature was surveyed for genes that are highly altered (>2.5-fold) by KLF2 overexpression (17) or deficiency (16) in T lineage cells. These genes were then cross-referenced with the TN2/TNX microarray data set detailed under "Experimental Procedures." The "KLF2" column represents the -fold change documented in the indicated reference following overexpression and/or repression of KLF2 signaling.

 
The capacity of TCDD to alter expression of KLF2-regulated genes was then confirmed at both the protein (Fig. 4, A and B) and mRNA level (Fig. 4C). First, we determined protein expression of beta7 integrin using a fluorochrome-labeled antibody against this epitope. Exposure to TCDD was found to increase protein levels exclusively in TN thymocytes (Fig. 4A). In order to determine which TN populations were affected, we further examined beta7 expression using fluorescent gating similar to that shown in Fig. 2B. We observed that beta7 expression was induced by TCDD exclusively in TN2 and TN3 stage cells (Fig. 4B). Although the relative increase in beta7 expression was similar in both stages (~6-fold), the TN2 population was found to have the highest absolute levels of beta7 expression by at least 1 order of magnitude. Next, we confirmed the microarray results (shown in Table 3) at the mRNA level using qRT-PCR. Due to the rarity of the TN2/TNX population, cells were sorted from a pool of Rag-1 null mice treated for 48 h with TCDD or Me2SO control (n = 5 for each treatment). This experiment was repeated to obtain two independent RNA samples for each treatment, which are referred to as RT-PCR sets "A" and "B" in Fig. 4C. Using qRT-PCR, we verified that TCDD exposure alters expression of beta7 integrin, s100a4, Edg1 (endothelial differentiation, sphingolipid G-protein-coupled receptor 1)/S1P1, Cdkn2d, Emp3 (epithelial membrane protein 3), IL10R{alpha}, CD52, and Ptpn13 (protein-tyrosine phosphatase, nonreceptor type 13) mRNA; the direction and magnitude of each change was similar to our previous microarray results (Fig. 4C).


Figure 3
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 3.
KLF2 is induced by TCDD in an AHR-dependent manner. A, TN2/TNX stage thymocytes were harvested from a pool of Rag-1 null mice treated with TCDD or Me2SO for 12 h (n = 3). Expression of the depicted genes was determined by qRT-PCR. B, TN3 stage thymocytes were sorted from a pool of C57BL/6 or AHR null mice treated with Me2SO or TCDD for 24 h (n = 3). Expression of Cyp1b1 and KLF2 was assayed by qRT-PCR.

 


Figure 4
View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 4.
Exposure to TCDD alters expression of the KLF2 regulon. A and B, C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) were treated with Me2SO or TCDD for 72 h. A, expression of beta7 integrin was assessed using flow cytometry. A representative Me2SO (light gray) and TCDD (black) thymus was selected for each histogram. B, the expression of beta7 integrin in each TN population (n = 5). Data are presented as the mean ± S.D. **, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0. 001. C, TN2/TNX stage cells were sorted from two independent pools of Rag-1 null mice (n = 5) treated with TCDD or Me2SO (DMSO) for 48 h. The expression level of each mRNA was determined via qRT-PCR; microarray results are presented for comparison.

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Mammalian exposure to the environmental pollutant TCDD provokes a broad spectrum of toxic end points (1, 2). The effects of TCDD on the thymus are particularly potent (Fig. 2A). We hypothesized that exogenous activation of the AHR transcription factor could lead to ectopic expression of a gene or genes deleterious to normal thymopoeisis. We therefore set out to determine (i) which stages of thymocyte development are disturbed by TCDD and (ii) which genes are misexpressed in these affected populations.

A series of flow cytometry experiments established that TCDD impairs thymopoeisis as early as the TN2 stage of development (Figs. 1 and 2). In initial studies, we observed that TCDD exposure induces the formation of a novel phenotypic derivative of the TN2 stage of development, which we termed TNX (Fig. 1, B and C). Moreover, we found that the three developmental stages downstream of TN2/TNX exhibit acute TCDD-induced cell loss, whereas the developmental stages upstream of TN2/TNX exhibit no change in cell number (Fig. 2C). These results suggested that TCDD-induced cell loss could be precipitated via interference in the transition from the TN2 to TN3 stage of thymopoeisis.

Microarray studies of TN2 cells in both their normal and TCDD-induced states (TNX) confirmed that TCDD substantially alters TN2 thymopoeisis. We found that TCDD alters the expression of over 350 genes by at least 5-fold and ~2000 genes by at least 1.5-fold. As expected, many known AHR-regulated genes were found to be induced by TCDD exposure, such as Cyp1b1 (27), Lgals3 (24), PON1 (28), NQO1 (29), AHRR (30), and Scin (25). The preponderance of gene expression changes, however, has not been previously identified as TCDD-inducible. Since the AHR is thought to be a relatively nonpromiscuous regulator of transcription, we hypothesized that this massive change in gene expression could be preceded by misexpression of a central regulator of T lineage biology.

We observed that KLF2, a member of the Sp1 family of transcription factors, is ectopically expressed in TN2 and TN3 stage thymocytes within 12 h and 24 h of TCDD exposure, respectively (Fig. 3). Similar to other members of the Sp1/KLF family, KLF2 is a potent and promiscuous regulator of transcription that binds to CACC and GC-rich regions in gene promoters (26). Although KLF2 expression is limited to specific cell lineages (31), it has been demonstrated to be a master regulator of cellular function in these cell types, including vascular endothelial cells (32–34), adipocytes (33, 35), monocytes (36), and T lymphocytes, in which the KLF2 regulon has a dual role in controlling both T cell migration and proliferation (15–19). In normal T cell development, KLF2 is first expressed in mature SP thymocytes (14, 15) and triggers emigration to the peripheral immune organs via transcriptional control of a gene battery, which includes Edg1/S1P1 and beta7 integrin (18). In the peripheral T cell population, KLF2 is constitutively expressed in the absence of TCR stimulation and is a negative regulator of T lineage activation/proliferation (15, 16). It has been demonstrated that forced expression of KLF2 is sufficient to program T cell quiescence (16), whereas deficiency results in spontaneous activation (15).

In TCDD-treated mice, induction of KLF2 occurs concomitantly with misexpression of numerous KLF2-regulated genes (Fig. 4). This phenotype includes robust activation of Edg1/S1P1 and beta7 integrin, which have a critical role in thymocyte egress (18, 37–39), as well as Cdkn2d, which negatively regulates cell cycle entry (40) (Fig. 4). Moreover, these genes likely represent only a small portion of the total number affected by premature expression of KLF2. Previous studies in vascular endothelial cells have indicated that upwards of 1000 genes are transcriptionally controlled through the expression level of KLF2 (33). These results indicate that ectopic expression of KLF2 may have a widespread effect on the TN transcriptome. Although the cumulative effects of these transcriptional changes on TN biology are uncertain, it is interesting to note that TCDD has been previously demonstrated to induce both premature emigration (10) and proliferation arrest of TN cells (9). Due to the prominent role of the KLF2 regulon in enforcing these phenotypes in SP biology (15–17), it is tempting to speculate that ectopic expression of KLF2 may have a similar effect on TN stage cells. Overall, these results suggest that premature expression of KLF2 has a substantial effect on TN thymopoeisis. Although these results do not deny the possible importance of additional factors, the current study identifies KLF2 as a promising molecular link between TCDD exposure and thymic toxicity.

The full mechanism underlying the interplay between TCDD and the KLF2 signaling pathways is currently unclear. Although KLF2 induction occurs during the nascent stage of TCDD toxicity and is AHR-dependent (Fig. 3B), we have not yet been able to demonstrate direct AHR/promoter interaction. Chromatin immunoprecipitation studies are highly intractable for TN stage cells, and we have not yet identified a more suitable cell line or tissue that exhibits a KLF2 response to TCDD. In the absence of such data, it remains possible that KLF2 is induced by TCDD via an indirect AHR-mediated protein and/or lipid response. Independent of mechanism, it is plausible that nonthymocyte cell populations are also affected by AHR/KLF2 interplay. Due to the substantial role of KLF2 in determining cell phenotype, future studies should be conducted to determine if AHR/KLF2 interactions influence additional end points of TCDD toxicity and/or endogenous biology. Of particular interest is vascular physiology, wherein both the AHR and KLF2 have a central role in the transcriptional response to shear stress (33, 41, 42).


   CONCLUSIONS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
 
The environmental pollutant TCDD is a highly toxic agonist of the AHR signaling pathway. In this report, we have demonstrated that TCDD induces ectopic expression of KLF2 and its associated regulon during early thymopoeisis. Overall, these results demonstrate a novel relationship between AHR and KLF2 signaling and strongly suggest that KLF2 has an important role in aspects of TCDD toxicity.


   FOOTNOTES
 
* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grants R37-ES05703, T32-CA009135, and P30-CA014520. The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. Back

Formula The on-line version of this article (available at http://www.jbc.org) contains supplemental Figs. S1–S4. Back

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed: McArdle Laboratory for Cancer Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1400 University Ave., Madison, WI 53706-1599. Tel.: 608-262-1209; Fax: 608-262-2824; E-mail: bradfield{at}oncology.wisc.edu.

2 The abbreviations used are: TCDD, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin; AHR, aryl hydrocarbon receptor; DP, double positive; SP, single positive; TCR, T cell receptor; TN, triple negative; TNX, triple negative X; PE, phycoerythrin; RT, reverse transcription; qRT, quantitative reverse transcription. Back


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank the laboratory of Dr. John Hogenesch for performing the microarray comparisons and the flow cytometry staff at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Comprehensive Cancer Center.



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Schecter, A., Birnbaum, L., Ryan, J. J., and Constable, J. D. (2006) Environ. Res. 101, 419-428[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Birnbaum, L. S., and Tuomisto, J. (2000) Food Addit. Contam. 17, 275-288[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Poland, A., and Glover, E. (1980) Mol. Pharmacol. 17, 86-94[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Fernandez-Salguero, P. M., Hilbert, D. M., Rudikoff, S., Ward, J. M., and Gonzalez, F. J. (1996) Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 140, 173-179[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. Vorderstrasee, B., Steppan, L., Silverstone, A., and Kerkvliet, N. I. (2001) Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 171, 157-164[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Swanson, H. I., and Bradfield, C. A. (1993) Pharmacogenetics 3, 213-230[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  7. Gill, J., Malin, M., Sutherland, J., Gray, D., Hollander, G., and Boyd, R. (2003) Immunol. Rev. 195, 28-50[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. Godfrey, D., Kennedy, J., Suda, T., and Zlotnik, A. (1993) J. Immunol. 150, 4244-4252[Abstract]
  9. Laiosa, M. D., Wyman, A., Murante, F. G., Fiore, N. C., Staples, J. E., Gasiewicz, T. A., and Silverstone, A. E. (2003) J. Immunol. 171, 4582-4591[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Temchura, V. V., Frericks, M., Nacken, W., and Esser, C. (2005) Eur. J. Immunol. 35, 2738-2747[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  11. Staples, J. E., Murante, F. G., Fiore, N. C., Gasiewicz, T. A., and Silverstone, A. E. (1998) J. Immunol. 160, 3844-3854[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Tomita, S., Jiang, H. B., Ueno, T., Takagi, S., Tohi, K., Maekawa, S., Miyatake, A., Furukawa, A., Gonzalez, F. J., Takeda, J., Ichikawa, Y., and Takahama, Y. (2003) J. Immunol. 171, 4113-4120[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Bunger, M. K., Moran, S. M., Glover, E., Thomae, T. L., Lahvis, G. P., Lin, B. C., and Bradfield, C. A. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 17767-17774[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Puthier, D., Joly, F., Irla, M., Saade, M., Victorero, G., Loriod, B., and Nguyen, C. (2004) J. Immunol. 173, 6109-6118[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Kuo, C. T., Veselits, M. L., and Leiden, J. M. (1997) Science 277, 1986-1990[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Buckley, A. F., Kuo, C. T., and Leiden, J. M. (2001) Nat. Immunol. 2, 698-704[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Wu, J., and Lingrel, J. B. (2004) Oncogene 23, 8088-8096[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  18. Carlson, C. M., Endrizzi, B. T., Wu, J., Ding, X., Weinreich, M. A., Walsh, E. R., Wani, M. A., Lingrel, J. B., Hogquist, K. A., and Jameson, S. C. (2006) Nature 442, 299-302[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  19. Haaland, R. E., Yu, W., and Rice, A. P. (2005) Mol. Immunol. 42, 627-641[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Mombaerts, P. I. J., Johnson, R. S., Herrup, K., Tonegawa, S., Papaioannoi, V. E. (1992) Cell 68, 869-877[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  21. Schmidt, J. V., Su, G. H., Reddy, J. K., Simon, M. C., and Bradfield, C. A. (1996) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 93, 6731-6736[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Panda, S., Antoch, M. P., Miller, B. H., Su, A. I., Schook, A. B., Straume, M., Schultz, P. G., Kay, S. A., Takahashi, J. S., and Hogenesch, J. B. (2002) Cell 109, 307-320[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  23. Su, A. I., Wiltshire, T., Batalov, S., Lapp, H., Ching, K. A., Block, D., Zhang, J., Soden, R., Hayakawa, M., Kreiman, G., Cooke, M. P., Walker, J. R., and Hogenesch, J. B. (2004) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 101, 6062-6067[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Frericks, M., Temchura, V. V., Majora, M., Stutte, S., and Esser, C. (2006) Biol. Chem. 387, 1219-1226[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  25. Svensson, C., Silverstone, A. E., Lai, Z. W., and Lundberg, K. (2002) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 291, 1194-1200[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  26. Kaczynski, J., Cook, T., and Urrutia, R. (2003) Genome Biol. 4, 206[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  27. Sutter, T. R., Tang, Y. M., Hayes, C. L., Wo, Y.-Y. P., Jabs, E. W., Li, X., Yin, H., Cody, C. W., and Greenlee, W. F. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 13092-13099[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Gouedard, C., Barouki, R., and Morel, Y. (2004) Mol. Cell Biol. 24, 5209-5222[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Beatty, P., and Neal, R. A. (1976) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 68, 197-204[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  30. Mimura, J., Ema, M., Sogawa, K., and Fujii-Kuriyama, Y. (1999) Genes Dev. 13, 20-25[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Su, A. I., Cooke, M. P., Ching, K. A., Hakak, Y., Walker, J. R., Wiltshire, T., Orth, A. P., Vega, R. G., Sapinoso, L. M., Moqrich, A., Patapoutian, A., Hampton, G. M., Schultz, P. G., and Hogenesch, J. B. (2002) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 99, 4465-4470[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Dekker, R. J., van Thienen, J. V., Rohlena, J., de Jager, S. C., Elderkamp, Y. W., Seppen, J., de Vries, C. J., Biessen, E. A., van Berkel, T. J., Pannekoek, H., and Horrevoets, A. J. (2005) Am. J. Pathol. 167, 609-618[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Dekker, R. J., Boon, R. A., Rondaij, M. G., Kragt, A., Volger, O. L., Elderkamp, Y. W., Meijers, J. C., Voorberg, J., Pannekoek, H., and Horrevoets, A. J. (2006) Blood
  34. Parmar, K. M., Larman, H. B., Dai, G., Zhang, Y., Wang, E. T., Moorthy, S. N., Kratz, J. R., Lin, Z., Jain, M. K., Gimbrone, M. A., Jr., and Garcia-Cardena, G. (2006) J. Clin. Invest. 116, 49-58[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  35. Banerjee, S. S., Feinberg, M. W., Watanabe, M., Gray, S., Haspel, R. L., Denkinger, D. J., Kawahara, R., Hauner, H., and Jain, M. K. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 2581-2584[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Das, H., Kumar, A., Lin, Z., Patino, W. D., Hwang, P. M., Feinberg, M. W., Majumder, P. K., and Jain, M. K. (2006) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 103, 6653-6658[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Allende, M. L., Dreier, J. L., Mandala, S., and Proia, R. L. (2004) J. Biol. Chem. 279, 15396-15401[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Matloubian, M., Lo, C. G., Cinamon, G., Lesneski, M. J., Xu, Y., Brinkmann, V., Allende, M. L., Proia, R. L., and Cyster, J. G. (2004) Nature 427, 355-360[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  39. Wagner, N., Lohler, J., Kunkel, E. J., Ley, K., Leung, E., Krissansen, G., Rajewsky, K., and Muller, W. (1996) Nature 382, 366-370[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  40. Sherr, C. J., and Roberts, J. M. (1999) Genes Dev. 13, 1501-1512[Free Full Text]
  41. Dekker, R. J., van Soest, S., Fontijn, R. D., Salamanca, S., de Groot, P. G., VanBavel, E., Pannekoek, H., and Horrevoets, A. J. (2002) Blood 100, 1689-1698[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. McMillan, B. J., and Bradfield, C. A. (2007) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 104, 1412-1417[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Toxicol SciHome page
K. Nohara, K. Ao, Y. Miyamoto, T. Suzuki, S. Imaizumi, Y. Tateishi, S. Omura, C. Tohyama, and T. Kobayashi
Arsenite-Induced Thymus Atrophy is Mediated by Cell Cycle Arrest: A Characteristic Downregulation of E2F-Related Genes Revealed by a Microarray Approach
Toxicol. Sci., February 1, 2008; 101(2): 226 - 238.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Immunol.Home page
L. Z. Shi, N. G. Faith, Y. Nakayama, M. Suresh, H. Steinberg, and C. J. Czuprynski
The Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Is Required for Optimal Resistance to Listeria monocytogenes Infection in Mice
J. Immunol., November 15, 2007; 179(10): 6952 - 6962.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
282/17/12590    most recent
M611446200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McMillan, B. J.
Right arrow Articles by Bradfield, C. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McMillan, B. J.
Right arrow Articles by Bradfield, C. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 All ASBMB Journals   Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 
 Journal of Lipid Research   ASBMB Today 
Copyright © 2007 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
Advertisement
spacer
Advertisement
Advertisement