The BPA-substitute bisphenol S alters the transcription of genes related to endocrine, stress response and biotransformation pathways in the aquatic midge Chironomus riparius (Diptera, Chironomidae)

Abstract

Bisphenol S (BPS) is an industrial alternative to the endocrine disruptor bisphenol A (BPA), and can be found in many products labeled “BPA-free”. Its use has grown in recent years, and presently it is considered a ubiquitous emerging pollutant. To date there is a lack of information on the effects of BPS on invertebrates, although they represent more than 95% of known species in the animal kingdom and are crucial for the structure and proper function of ecosystems. In this study, real-time RT-PCR was used to determine the early detrimental effects of BPS on the transcriptional rate of genes in the model species Chironomus riparius, specifically those related to the ecdysone pathway (EcR, ERR, E74, Vtg, cyp18a1) crucial for insect development and metamorphosis, stress and biotransformation mechanisms (hsp70, hsp40, cyp4g, GPx, GSTd3) that regulate adaptive responses and determine survival, and ribosome biogenesis (its2, rpL4, rpL13) which is essential for protein synthesis and homeostasis. While 24-hour exposure to 0.5, 5, 50, and 500 μg/L BPS had no effect on larval survival, almost all the studied genes were upregulated following a non-monotonic dose-response curve. Genes with the greatest increases in transcriptional activity (fold change relative to control) were EcR (3.8), ERR (2), E74 (2.4), cyp18a1 (2.5), hsp70 (1.7), hsp40 (2.5), cyp4g (6.4), GPx (1.8), and GST (2.1), while others including Vtg, GAPDH, and selected ribosomal genes remained stable. We also measured the transcriptional activity of these genes 24 hours after BPS withdrawal and a general downregulation compared to controls was observed, though not significant in most cases. Our findings showed that BPS exposure altered the transcriptional profile of these genes, which may have consequences for the hormone system and several metabolic pathways. Although further research is needed to elucidate its mode of action, these results raise new concerns about the safety of BPA alternatives.

The effects of different bisphenol derivatives on oxidative stress, DNA damage and DNA repair in RWPE‐1 cells: A comparative study

“…There are many studies that have shed some light on the possible unwanted effects of BPA; however, there are very few investigations on the effects of BPA alternatives, such as BPF and/or BPS (Herrero et al, ). In the present study, we assessed the cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of BPA and its alternatives (BPF and BPS) on RWPE‐1 cells.…”

Soil Microbiome Response to Contamination with Bisphenol A, Bisphenol F and Bisphenol S

“…Bisphenol F (BPF) differs from BPA by the absence of two methyl groups bound to the central carbon atom of its molecule that results in its lower polarity. On the other hand, because of the presence of two phenolic groups on each side of the sulphonic group, BPS has a similar chemical structure to BPA, but higher thermal stability [9,10]. Bisphenol A (BPA) is formed by condensation of an acetone molecule and two molecules of phenol, catalysed by hydrogen chloride or an ion-exchange resin [11].…”

Drinking water pollutants may affect the immune system: concerns regarding COVID-19 health effects

“…Many pollutants previously considered only in light of their endocrine disruption capability have recently also been implicated in the activation of several immune pathways involved in both autoimmune disease development and autoimmune reactivity provocation, as estrogen has also been reported as playing an important role in the immune system altering inflammatory mediator responses and humoral immune response (Lee et al 1994;Yoshino et al 2003;Haghmorad et al 2014). These include contaminants such as metals; PFAS; plastic components, such as BPA; and plasticizers, like phthalates (Dong et al 1998;Kharrazian 2014;Hansen et al 2015), although studies are still incipient in this regard. Although many in vitro studies have demonstrated cytokine effects, among other immune responses by several pollutants (Shertzer et al 1985;Li et al 2013), only assessments performed through the drinking water exposure route in mammals (mice, rats, rabbits) in laboratory conditions or concerning human cohorts are included herein.…”