» Articles » PMID: 32119699

Triploidy in Zebrafish Larvae: Effects on Gene Expression, Cell Size and Cell Number, Growth, Development and Swimming Performance

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2020 Mar 3
PMID 32119699
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

There is renewed interest in the regulation and consequences of cell size adaptations in studies on understanding the ecophysiology of ectotherms. Here we test if induction of triploidy, which increases cell size in zebrafish (Danio rerio), makes for a good model system to study consequences of cell size. Ideally, diploid and triploid zebrafish should differ in cell size, but should otherwise be comparable in order to be suitable as a model. We induced triploidy by cold shock and compared diploid and triploid zebrafish larvae under standard rearing conditions for differences in genome size, cell size and cell number, development, growth and swimming performance and expression of housekeeping genes and hsp70.1. Triploid zebrafish have larger but fewer cells, and the increase in cell size matched the increase in genome size (+ 50%). Under standard conditions, patterns in gene expression, ontogenetic development and larval growth were near identical between triploids and diploids. However, under demanding conditions (i.e. the maximum swimming velocity during an escape response), triploid larvae performed poorer than their diploid counterparts, especially after repeated stimuli to induce swimming. This result is consistent with the idea that larger cells have less capacity to generate energy, which becomes manifest during repeated physical exertion resulting in increased fatigue. Triploidy induction in zebrafish appears a valid method to increase specifically cell size and this provides a model system to test for consequences of cell size adaptation for the energy budget and swimming performance of this ectothermic vertebrate.

Citing Articles

Behavioral transcriptomic effects of triploidy and probiotic therapy (Bifidobacterium, Lactobacillus, and Lactococcus mixture) on juvenile Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha).

Frank C, Sadeghi J, Heath D, Semeniuk C Genes Brain Behav. 2024; 23(3):e12898.

PMID: 38817102 PMC: 11140169. DOI: 10.1111/gbb.12898.


Comparison of Diploid and Triploid Atlantic Salmon () Physiological Embryonic Development.

Howard C, Taylor J, Migaud H, Gutierrez A, Bekaert M Animals (Basel). 2023; 13(21).

PMID: 37958107 PMC: 10647732. DOI: 10.3390/ani13213352.


MCPIP1 functions as a safeguard of early embryonic development.

Lichawska-Cieslar A, Szukala W, Prajsnar T, Pooranachandran N, Kulecka M, Dabrowska M Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):16944.

PMID: 37805647 PMC: 10560294. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-44294-1.


The Nuclear-to-Cytoplasmic Ratio: Coupling DNA Content to Cell Size, Cell Cycle, and Biosynthetic Capacity.

Balachandra S, Sarkar S, Amodeo A Annu Rev Genet. 2022; 56:165-185.

PMID: 35977407 PMC: 10165727. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-genet-080320-030537.


Body mass and cell size shape the tolerance of fishes to low oxygen in a temperature-dependent manner.

Verberk W, Sandker J, van de Pol I, Urbina M, Wilson R, McKenzie D Glob Chang Biol. 2022; 28(19):5695-5707.

PMID: 35876025 PMC: 9542040. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.16319.


References
1.
Hermaniuk A, Rybacki M, Taylor J . Low Temperature and Polyploidy Result in Larger Cell and Body Size in an Ectothermic Vertebrate. Physiol Biochem Zool. 2016; 89(2):118-29. DOI: 10.1086/684974. View

2.
Khaliullina-Skultety H, Zi Chao N, Harris W . Induction of Hypoxia in Living Frog and Zebrafish Embryos. J Vis Exp. 2017; (124). PMC: 5608522. DOI: 10.3791/55710. View

3.
White M, McLaren I . Copepod development rates in relation to genome size and 18S rDNA copy number. Genome. 2000; 43(5):750-5. DOI: 10.1139/g00-048. View

4.
Bagwell C, Adams E . Fluorescence spectral overlap compensation for any number of flow cytometry parameters. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993; 677:167-84. DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb38775.x. View

5.
SZARSKI H . Cell size and nuclear DNA content in vertebrates. Int Rev Cytol. 1976; 44:93-111. DOI: 10.1016/s0074-7696(08)61648-4. View