Cited by 46Epigenetics and DNA MethylationFolate and B Vitamins ResearchAir Quality and Health Impacts

PM2.5-induced extensive DNA methylation changes in the heart of zebrafish embryos and the protective effect of folic acid

Jiang, Yan, Li, Jianxiang, Ren, Fei, Ji, Cheng, Aniagu, Stanley, Chen, Tao·2019·Environmental Pollution

Abstract

We previously found that folic acid (FA) attenuated cardiac defects in zebrafish embryos exposed to extractable organic matter (EOM) from PM2.5, but the underlining mechanisms remain to be elucidated. Since DNA methylation is crucial to cardiac development, we hypothesized that EOM-induced aberrant DNA methylation changes could be diminished by FA supplementation. In this study, zebrafish embryos were exposed to EOM in the absence or presence of FA. Genomic-wide DNA methylation analysis identified both DNA hypo- and hyper-methylation changes in CCGG sites in zebrafish embryos exposed to EOM, which were attenuated by FA supplementation. We identified a total of 316 genes with extensive DNA methylation changes in EOM samples but little or no DNA methylation changes in EOM plus FA samples. The genes were involved in critical cellular processes and signaling pathways important for embryo development. In addition, the EOM-decreased SAM/SAH ratio was counteracted by FA supplementation. Furthermore, FA attenuated the EOM-induced changes in the expression of genes involved in the regulation of DNA methylation and in folate biosynthesis. In conclusion, our data suggest that FA supplementation protected zebrafish embryos from the cardiac developmental toxicity of PM2.5 by alleviating EOM-induced DNA methylation changes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.113331

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jiang, Y., Li, J., Ren, F., Ji, C., Aniagu, S., & Chen, T.
Affiliations
  • Soochow University (CN)
  • Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (US)
Corresponding author
Chen, Tao
Venue
Environmental Pollution
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-12
Volume
255
Issue
Pt 3
Pages
113331
ISSN
0269-7491 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2979482602
Cited by
46
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2
FWCI
1.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Pollution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81741005, 81870239, 81972999)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Folate and B Vitamins Research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
Keywords
PM2.5, extractable organic matter, DNA methylation, folic acid, zebrafish embryos, heart development, SAM/SAH ratio, folate biosynthesis, epigenetic regulation, air pollution exposure
MeSH terms
Animals, Folic Acid, Heart, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Zebrafish, Signal Transduction, DNA Methylation, Embryonic Development, Particulate Matter

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review