Mice exposures
The experimental protocols were approved by the Animal Ethics Research Board of the University of Saskatchewan (Protocol # 20160106). Male C57BL/6 mice (Charles River Laboratories, Montreal, QC Canada), 6–8 weeks old, were maintained at the Laboratory Animal Services Unit of the University of Saskatchewan. Mice were fed ad libitum and were acclimatized for one week after arrival.
Mice were divided into glyphosate and control treatment groups (n = 5 per group). The 1 µg dose of glyphosate treatment was selected based on glyphosate levels found in the agricultural environment and has been utilized in other studies (11). The stock solution of glyphosate (0.8 M; analytical grade PESTANAL standard, Sigma, St. Louis, MO USA) was prepared in Hank’s Balanced Salt Solution (HBSS). It was vortexed for 10 minutes and syringe filtered (0.22 µm; Fisher Scientific). Mice received 40 µL of either glyphosate (1 µg/40 µl) or saline intranasally for 1-day or daily for 5-days or 10-days. Mice were lightly anesthetized using isoflurane before treatments. There were no differences in the weight of mice in the control and the glyphosate-treated groups. After 4-hours of last treatment, mice were euthanized by CO2 inhalation, and BAL fluid and lung samples were collected.
Bronchoalveolar lavage collection and processing
BAL fluid was collected by washing the airways three times with 0.5 ml ice-cold HBSS. The collected BAL fluid was centrifuged at 1000 g for 10 minutes at 4° C, and supernatants were stored at -80° C for cytokine analysis. Cells from BAL fluid was resuspended in HBSS and kept on ice until used for leukocyte counts.
Total and differential leukocyte count
The total and differential leukocyte counts in BAL fluid were performed using a hemocytometer and cytospin stained with Protocol Hema 3 kit (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA), respectively.
Cytokine levels
Multiple cytokines in BAL fluid were measured using a Custom Mouse Procartaplex Multiplex Immunoassay (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA), according to manufacturer’s instructions for magnetic bead-based ELISA. Plates were read using a Bioplex 200 system (Bio-Rad, Mississauga, ON Canada) and Bioplex Manager Software (Bio-Rad, Mississauga, ON Canada).
Lung tissue collection and processing
Following BAL fluid collection, the right lung was tied off at the primary bronchus, and the left lung was fixed in-situ through intratracheal instillation of 200 µl of 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA). The right lung was removed and snap-frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at − 800 C for eosinophil peroxidase (EPO) and RNA analysis. The fixative-instilled left lung was further submerged in 4% PFA for 16 hours at 40 C. Lung tissue was then washed through ascending grades of alcohol before embedding in paraffin. Lung sections of 5 µm thickness were cut from paraffin-embedded tissues. Hematoxylin & eosin staining, and immunohistochemistry were performed on these lung sections.
Eosinophil peroxidase quantification
Lung tissues were homogenized using 2 mm Zirconia beads (BioSpec, Bartlesville, OK USA) in tubes containing RIPA lysis buffer supplemented with 1X Halt Protease and Phosphatase Inhibitor Cocktail (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA) in a Mini- Beadbeater-24 homogenizer (BioSpec, Bartlesville, OK USA) for two, 1-minute rounds. The tubes were cooled on ice in between rounds of homogenization. The total protein concentration of lung homogenates was determined using Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Eosinophil peroxidase (EPO) was quantified using a Mouse Eosinophil Peroxidase DuoSet ELISA (LifeSpan Biosciences, Seattle, WA USA). Plates were read using a BioTek Synergy HT plate reader (BioTek, Winooski, VT USA) at 450 nm.
Histology and scoring for inflammation
Lung sections from all the mice were stained with hematoxylin & eosin stain. Two stained lung sections from each mouse were reviewed and scored for lung inflammation. Each of the sections on the slide was reviewed at different magnifications (x20, x40, x100). Each section's scoring was performed by multiple reviewers blinded to the exposure groups, and scores were averaged. Cellular infiltration in alveolar, perivascular, and peribronchiolar compartments of lungs were scored. Each parameter was given a score based on the intensity and was statistically analyzed (0: absent, 1: mild, 2: moderate, 3: severe).
Immunohistochemistry and analysis
Lung sections from all mice were stained with antibodies against ICAM-1, VCAM-1, and vWF markers. Briefly, lung sections were immersed in a series of xylene baths for deparaffinization and different alcohol grades for rehydration. Endogenous peroxidase activity was quenched with 0.5% hydrogen peroxide in methanol for 20 minutes. Antigen unmasking and blocking were done for 30 minutes with 2 mg/ml pepsin and 1% bovine serum albumin, respectively. The lung sections were incubated overnight at 40 C with the following primary antibodies: ICAM-1 (dilution 1: 100; rabbit monoclonal anti-mouse ICAM-1, ab79707, Abcam Inc., ON Canada), VCAM-1 (dilution 1:100; rabbit monoclonal anti-mouse VCAM-1, ab134047, Abcam Inc., ON Canada), and vWF (dilution 1:200; rabbit monoclonal anti-mouse vWF, ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA). Following overnight incubation, the secondary goat anti-rabbit antibody (dilution 1:200; ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA) was added onto tissue sections. Slides were incubated for 1 hour at room temperature in a humidified chamber. The color was developed using a peroxidase kit (Vector laboratories, Burlington ON, Canada) according to manufacturer’s instructions and counterstained with methyl green (Vector laboratories, Burlington ON, Canada). In the end, slides were dehydrated through a series of ethanol concentrations and were fixed with xylene before mounting. Controls with the omission of the primary antibody or secondary antibody were run at the same time.
The expression of ICAM-1, VCAM-1, and vWF was reviewed in five random fields of the lung sections from each mouse (N = 3). Expression of ICAM-1 was scored in the vasculature, and bronchial epithelium. Each parameter staining was given a score based on staining intensity by a reviewer blinded to exposure groups (0: no or occasional staining, 1: weak staining, 2: moderate staining, 3: intense staining).
RNA isolation and real-time PCR
Lung homogenates were prepared using 2 mm Zirconia beads (BioSpec, Bartlesville, OK USA) in tubes containing RLT lysis buffer (Qiagen, Chatsworth, CA USA) in a Mini-Beadbeater-24 homogenizer (BioSpec, Bartlesville, OK USA). RNA was extracted using the RNeasy Plus Mini Kit (Qiagen, Chatsworth, CA USA) according to manufacturer’s instructions. Purified mRNA was quantified using a Take3 plate and BioTek Synergy HT plate reader (BioTek, Winooski, VT USA). cDNA was generated using iScript Reverse Transcription Supermix (BioRad, Hercules, CA USA) with 0.5 µg mRNA. PCR was conducted in a CFX96 Touch Real-Time PCR Detection System (BioRad, Hercules, CA USA) using the following protocol: 250 C for 5 minutes, 460 C for 20 minutes, and 950 C for 1 minute.
Real-time PCR was performed using probes for mouse ICAM-1 (Mm00516023_m1), TLR-4 (Mm00445273_m1), TLR-2 (Mm00442346_m1), Hsp72, (Mm01159846_s1) and A20 (Mm00437121_m1) (Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY USA). Each reaction was carried out in duplicate using ribosomal RNA (Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY USA) as an endogenous control. PCR was conducted in a CFX96 Touch Real-Time PCR Detection System (BioRad, Hercules, CA USA). PCR reactions were carried out as follows: 50° C for 2 minutes, 95° C for 10 minutes followed by 40 cycles at 95° C for 15 seconds and 60° C for 1 minute. Relative quantification was estimated from each target gene’s cycle threshold obtained from real-time PCR data followed by analysis with the ΔΔCt method.
Cell culture experiment and treatments
A549 cell lines were obtained from American Type Culture Collection (ATCC, Manassas, VA USA). A549 cells were grown in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Media (DMEM, ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum containing penicillin and streptomycin (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA) at 37° C and 5% CO2 until confluence was reached. Cells were dissociated using Tryp- LE Select (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA) and counted using a hemocytometer. For treatments, A549 cells were seeded at a density of 0.5 x 106 per well in 96 well plates and allowed to attach overnight. Cells were washed with 1X PBS (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA) before treatments. Glyphosate treatment solutions were prepared in DMEM serum-free media using the same stock solution used for mice experiments. Treatment with dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO, 0.5%) in serum-free DMEM media was used as a positive control. Untreated cells in serum-free DMEM were used as a negative control. A549 cells were treated for 24 hours at 37° C and 5% CO2 with different glyphosate concen trations or positive control.
Cytotoxicity
The viability of treated A549 cells was tested using a Cell Proliferation Kit 1 (MTT based, Roche, Catalog #11465007001) according to manufacturer’s instructions. Briefly, cells were incubated with 10 µl of MTT labeling reagent for 4 hours at 37° C and 5% CO2. Next, 100 µl of solubilization buffer was added to each well and incubated for 24 hours in the incubator. Plates were read using a BioTek Synergy HT plate reader (BioTek, Winooski, VT USA) at 450 nm.
Data analysis and statistics
Data was analyzed using GraphPad Prism 6 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA). Error bars represent mean +/- SD. For values outside the assay limit of detection, either the LLOD/2 (lowest limit of detection) or a minimum value below the lowest attained value was designated. Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA with a follow-up Tukey test for multiple comparisons. If the assumption of equal variance was not met, the data was either log-transformed, followed by one-way ANOVA and multiple comparison tests, or a non-parametric Kruskal-Wallace test was conducted. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant for differences between groups. For graphing of data, “a” indicates a significant difference compared with the control group; “1” indicates a significant difference compared with the 1-day exposure group; “2” indicates a significant difference compared with the 5-days exposure group.