Search

The aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR) plays pleiotropic roles in the development and physiology of vertebrates in conjunction with xenobiotic and endogenous ligands. It is best known for mediating the toxic effects of dioxin-like pollutants such as 2,3,7,8-tetracholordibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD). While most vertebrates possess at least one AHR that binds TCDD tightly, amphibian AHRs bind TCDD with very low affinity. Previous analyses of AHRs fromXenopus laevis(a frog; order Anura) andAmbystoma mexicanum(a salamander; order Urodela) identified three amino acid residues in the ligand-binding domain (LBD) that underlie low-affinity binding. InX. laevisAHR1β, these are A354, A370, and N325. Here we extend the analysis of amphibian AHRs to the caecilianGymnopis multiplicata, representing the remaining extant amphibian order, Apoda.G. multiplicataAHR groups with the monophyletic vertebrate AHR/AHR1 clade. The LBD includes all three signature residues of low TCDD affinity, and a structural homology model suggests that its architecture closely resembles those of other amphibians. In transactivation assays, the EC50 for reporter gene induction by TCDD was 17.17 nM, comparable toX. laevisAhR1β (26.23 nM) andAmbystomaAHR (34.09 nM) and dramatically higher than mouse AhR (0.13 nM), a trend generally reflected in direct measures of TCDD binding. These shared properties distinguish amphibian AHRs from the high-affinity proteins typical of both more ancient vertebrate groups (teleost fish) and those that appeared more recently (tetrapods). We suggest that AHRs with low TCDD affinity represent a basal characteristic that evolved in a common ancestor of all three extant amphibian groups.Research HighlightsA caecilian aryl hydrocarbon receptor exhibits low dioxin binding and sensitivity.The protein’s ligand-binding domain resembles frog and salamander AHRs in structure and function.AHR with low dioxin affinity likely evolved in a common ancestor of all three extant amphibian groups.Graphical Abstract

The Ah receptor (AhR) is a ligand-dependent transcription factor belonging to the basic helix-loop-helix Per-Arnt-Sim (bHLH-PAS) superfamily. Binding to and activation of the AhR by a variety of chemicals results in the induction of expression of diverse genes and production of a broad spectrum of biological and toxic effects. The AhR also plays important roles in several physiological responses, which has led it to become a novel target for the development of therapeutic drugs. Differences in the interactions of various ligands within the AhR ligand binding domain (LBD) may contribute to differential modulation of AhR functionality. We combined computational and experimental analyses to investigate the binding modes of a group of chemicals representative of major classes of AhR ligands. On the basis of a novel computational approach for molecular docking to the homology model of the AhR LBD that includes the receptor flexibility, we predicted specific residues within the AhR binding cavity that play a critical role in binding of three distinct groups of chemicals. The prediction was validated by site-directed mutagenesis and evaluation of the relative ligand binding affinities for the mutant AhRs. These results provide an avenue for understanding ligand modulation of the AhR functionality and for rational drug design.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. The aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) is a ligand-dependent transcription factor that modulates gene expression following its binding and activation by structurally diverse chemicals. Species differences in AhR functionality have been observed, with the mouse AhR (mAhR) and human AhR (hAhR) exhibiting significant differences in ligand binding, coactivator recruitment, gene expression and response. While the AhR agonist indirubin (IR) is a more potent activator of hAhR-dependent gene expression than the prototypical ligand 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD), it is a significantly less potent activator of the mAhR. DNA binding analysis confirmed the greater potency/efficacy of IR in stimulating transformation/DNA binding of the hAhR in vitro and domain-swapping experiments demonstrated that the enhanced response to IR was primarily due to the hAhR ligand binding domain (LBD). Site-directed mutagenesis and functional analysis studies revealed that mutation of H326 and A349 in the mAhR LBD to the corresponding residues in the hAhR LBD significantly increased the potency of IR. Since these mutations had no significant effect on ligand binding, these residues likely contribute to an enhanced efficiency of transformation/DNA binding by IR-bound hAhR. Molecular docking to mAhR LBD homology models further elucidated the different roles of the A375V mutation in TCDD and IR binding, as revealed by [3H]TCDD competitive binding results. These results demonstrate the differential binding of structurally diverse ligands within the LBD of a given AhR and confirm that amino acid differences within the LBD of AhRs contribute to significant species differences in ligand response.

The mediator of dioxin toxicity, aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR), has also important physiological functions. Selective AHR modulators (SAHRMs) share some effects of dioxins, except for their marked toxicity. We recently characterised toxicologically two novel SAHRMs, prodrugs IMA-08401 and IMA-07101 in rats, demonstrating that they are far less deleterious than the most toxic AHR-agonist, TCDD. Here, we analysed the in vitro toxicity and in silico AHR binding of the respective active, deacetylated metabolites, IMA-06201 (N-ethyl-N-phenyl-5-chloro-1,2-dihydro-4-hydroxy-1-methyl-2-oxo-quinoline-3-carboxamide) and IMA-06504 (N-(4-trifluoromethylphenyl)-1,2-dihydro-4-hydroxy-5-methoxy-1-methyl-2-oxo-quinoline-3-carboxamide). In H4IIE rat hepatoma cells, IMA-06201 and IMA-06504 induced CYP1A1 with comparable potencies and efficacies to those of TCDD. They had little effect on cell viability as assessed by LDH leakage and MTT reduction assays, and were not mutagenic in the Ames test, but IMA-06504 elicited a maximally 2.7-fold increase in micronuclei. Molecular docking simulations showed that similar to TCDD, they occupy the central region of AHR ligand binding cavity. Hence, while showing low to negligible in vitro toxicity, these novel SAHRMs bind to the AHR qualitatively in a similar fashion to TCDD, and appear comparably powerful AHR agonists. Combined with our earlier results demonstrating that they seem considerably less toxic in vivo than TCDD, these compounds are thus highly interesting new SAHRMs.