Comparison of Gene Expression Profiles Induced By Coarse, Fine, and Ultrafine Particulate Matter

Abstract

Coarse, fine, and ultrafine particulate matter (PM) fractions possess different physical properties and chemical compositions and may produce different adverse health effects. Studies were undertaken to determine whether or not gene expression patterns may be used to discriminate among the three size fractions. Airway epithelial cells obtained from 6 normal individuals were exposed to Chapel Hill coarse, fine or ultrafine PM (250 μg/ml) for 6 and 24 h (n = 3 different individuals each). RNA was isolated and hybridized to Affymetrix cDNA microarrays. Significant genes were identified and mapped to canonical pathways. Expression of selected genes was confirmed by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The numbers of genes altered by coarse, fine, and ultrafine PM increased from 0, 6, and 17 at 6 h to 1281, 302, and 455 at 24 h, respectively. The NRF2-mediated oxidative stress response, cell cycle:G2/M DNA damage checkpoint regulation, and mitotic roles of polo-like kinase were the top three pathways altered by all three fractions. Fine and ultrafine PM displayed more similar gene expression patterns. One example was the increased expression of metallothionein isoforms, reflecting the higher zinc content associated with fine and ultrafine fractions. A set of 10 genes was identified that could discriminate fine and ultrafine PM from coarse PM. These results indicate that common properties shared by the three size fractions as well as size-specific factors, e.g., compositions, may determine the effects on gene expression. Genomic markers may be used to discriminate coarse from fine and ultrafine PM.

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Zengzeng Wei of the Duke Institute of Genomic Sciences and Policy for microarray statistical support.

The research described in this article has been reviewed by the U.S. EPA National Health Effects and Environmental Research Laboratory and has been approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S. EPA, nor does mention of the trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.