Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T08:57:03.673Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seasonal and Morphological Variations of Brown Trout (Salmo trutta f. fario) Kidney Peroxisomes: A Stereological Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2016

Albina D. Resende ,
Alexandre Lobo-da-Cunha ,
Fernanda Malhão  and
Eduardo Rocha
Albina D. Resende*
Affiliation:
CESPU, Instituto de Investigação e Formação Avançada em Ciências e Tecnologias da Saúde, Departamento de Ciências, Instituto Universitário de Ciências da Saúde (IUCS), Gandra 4585-116, Paredes, Portugal Histomorphology, Physiopathology and Applied Toxicology Group (PATH), Interdisciplinary Centre of Marine and Environmental Research (CIIMAR), U. Porto, Porto 4050-123, Portugal
Alexandre Lobo-da-Cunha
Affiliation:
Department of Microscopy, Institute of Biomedical Sciences Abel Salazar (ICBAS), University of Porto (U. Porto), Porto 4099-003, Portugal Histomorphology, Physiopathology and Applied Toxicology Group (PATH), Interdisciplinary Centre of Marine and Environmental Research (CIIMAR), U. Porto, Porto 4050-123, Portugal
Fernanda Malhão
Affiliation:
Department of Microscopy, Institute of Biomedical Sciences Abel Salazar (ICBAS), University of Porto (U. Porto), Porto 4099-003, Portugal
Eduardo Rocha
Affiliation:
Department of Microscopy, Institute of Biomedical Sciences Abel Salazar (ICBAS), University of Porto (U. Porto), Porto 4099-003, Portugal Histomorphology, Physiopathology and Applied Toxicology Group (PATH), Interdisciplinary Centre of Marine and Environmental Research (CIIMAR), U. Porto, Porto 4050-123, Portugal
*
*Corresponding author. albina.resende@ipsn.cespu.pt
Get access

Abstract

Literature about fish kidney peroxisomes is scarce. To tackle this caveat, a stereological approach on renal peroxisome morphological parameters was performed for the first time in a fish, establishing correlations with maturation stages as it was previously done in brown trout liver. Three-year-old brown trout males and females were collected at the major seasons of their reproductive cycle. Trunk kidney was fixed and processed for catalase cytochemistry. Classical stereological methods were applied to electromicrographs to quantitate morphological parameters. Different seasonal variation patterns were observed between genders, and between renal proximal tubule segments I and II. In males, peroxisomes from proximal tubule segment II had a relatively higher volume and number in May, being individually bigger in February. Females presented similar trends, though with less marked variations. Overall, males and females did not show exactly the same seasonal patterns for most peroxisomal parameters, and no correlations were found between the latter and the gonado-somatic index (GSI). Hence, and despite the variations, the morphology of renal peroxisomes is not strictly correlated with gonad maturation kinetics, therefore suggesting that kidney peroxisome morphology is not seasonally modulated by sex steroids, like estradiol, as it seems to happen in liver peroxisomes.

Keywords

teleostrenal microbodiesreproductive cyclemorphometryultrastructure
Type
Biological Applications
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 22 , Issue 6 , December 2016 , pp. 1146 - 1154
Copyright
© Microscopy Society of America 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, B.G. & Loewen, R.D. (1975). Renal morphology of freshwater trout. Am J Anat 143, 93–113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baddeley, A.J., Gundersen, H.J.G. & Cruzorive, L.M. (1986). Estimation of surface-area from vertical sections. J Microsc 142, 259–276.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beier, K. & Fahimi, H.D. (1991). Environmental-pollution by common chemicals and peroxisome proliferation—efficient detection by cytochemistry and automatic image-analysis. Prog Histochem Cytochem 23, 150–163.Google Scholar
Beier, K., Volkl, A. & Fahimi, H.D. (1993). The impact of aging on enzyme proteins of rat-liver peroxisomes - quantitative-analysis by immunoblotting and immunoelectron microscopy. Virchows Arch B Cell Pathol Incl Mol Pathol 63, 139–146.Google Scholar
Buzello, M. (2000). Comparison of two stereological methods for quantitative renal morphology: A modified fractionator and modified weibel-gomez method. Pathol Res Pract 196, 111–117.Google Scholar
Cajaraville, M.P. & Ortiz-Zarragoitia, M. (2006). Specificity of the peroxisome proliferation response in mussels exposed to environmental pollutants. Aquat Toxicol 78, S117–S123.Google Scholar
Cascales, A.I., PerezLlamas, F., Marin, J.F. & Zamora, S. (1997). Perfusion of trout liver in situ. Description and validation of the technique. Reprod Nutr Dev 37, 29–40.Google Scholar
Decraemer, D., Pauwels, M., Hautekeete, M. & Roels, F. (1993). Alterations of hepatocellular peroxisomes in patients with cancer—catalase cytochemistry and morphometry. Cancer 71, 3851–3858.Google Scholar
Decraemer, D., Pauwels, M. & Vandenbranden, C. (1995). Alterations of peroxisomes in steatosis of the human liver—a quantitative study. Hepatology 22, 744–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeCraemer, D., Pauwels, M. & VandenBranden, C. (1996). Morphometric characteristics of human hepatocellular peroxisomes in alcoholic liver disease. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 20, 908–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeCraemer, D., Verbeelen, D. & VandenBranden, C. (1997). Morphometric characteristics of peroxisomes rats with chronic renal failure induced by five-sixth nephrectomy. APMIS 105, 631–636.Google Scholar
Elger, M., Hentschel, H., Dawson, M. & Renfro, J.L. (2000). Urinary Tract. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gundersen, H.J.G. (1977). Notes on estimation of numerical density of arbitrary profiles—edge effect. J Microsc 111, 219–223.Google Scholar
Gundersen, H.J.G. (1986). Stereology of arbitrary particles—a review of unbiased number and size estimators and the presentation of some new ones, in memory of Thompson, William, R. J Microsc 143, 3–45.Google Scholar
Hampton, J.A., McCuskey, P.A., McCuskey, R.S. & Hinton, D.E. (1985). Functional units in rainbow-trout (Salmo gairdneri) liver. 1. Arrangement and histochemical properties of hepatocytes. Anat Rec 213, 166–175.Google Scholar
Hentschel, H. & Elger, M. (1987). The distal nephron in the kidney of fishes—Introduction. Adv Anat Embryol Cell Biol 108, 1–146.Google Scholar
Hibiya, T. (1982). An atlas of fish histology - normal and pathological features. Stuttgart/New York: Gustav Fischer Verlag.Google Scholar
Hickman, C.P. & Trump, B.F. (1969). The Kidney. New York: Academic Press Inc.Google Scholar
Ibabe, A., Grabenbauer, M., Baumgart, E., Fahimi, H.D. & Cajaraville, M.P. (2002). Expression of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors in zebrafish (danio rerio). Histochem Cell Biol 118, 231–239.Google Scholar
Johkura, K., Usuda, N., Liang, Y., Nakazawa, A. & Ogiwara, N. (2000). Peroxisomes in permanent and provisional kidneys—phylogenic and ontogenic considerations. Cell Biochem Biophys 32, 305–312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsen, B.K. & Perkins, E.J. Jr. (2001). Target Organ Toxicity in the Kidney, 1st ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Madureira, T.V., Lopes, C., Malhão, F. & Rocha, E. (2015). Estimation of volume densities of hepatocytic peroxisomes in a model fish: Catalase conventional immunofluorescence versus cytochemistry for electron microscopy. Microsc Res Tech 78, 134–139.Google Scholar
Michalik, L., Desvergne, B. & Wahli, W. (2004). Peroxisome-proliferator-activated receptors and cancers: Complex stories. Nat Rev Cancer 4, 61–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ogawa, M. (1961). Comparative study on the external shape of the teleostean kidney with relation to phylogeny. Sci Rep Tokyo Bunrika Daigaku B10, 61–68.Google Scholar
Orbea, A., Beier, K., Volkl, A., Fahimi, H.D. & Cajaraville, M.P. (1999). Ultrastructural, immunocytochemical and morphometric characterization of liver peroxisomes in gray mullet, mugil cephalus . Cell Tissue Res 297, 493–502.Google Scholar
Oulmi, Y., Negele, R.D. & Braunbeck, T. (1995a). Segment specificity of the cytological response in rainbow-trout (oncorhynchus mykiss) renal tubules following prolonged exposure to sublethal concentrations of atrazine. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 32, 39–50.Google Scholar
Oulmi, Y., Negele, R.D. & Braunbeck, T. (1995b). Cytopathology of liver and kidney in rainbow-trout oncorhynchus mykiss after long-term exposure to sublethal concentrations of linuron. Dis Aquat Organ 21, 35–52.Google Scholar
Ozaki, K., Mahler, J.F., Haseman, J.K., Moomaw, C.R., Nicolette, M.L. & Nyska, A. (2001). Unique renal tubule changes induced in rats and mice by the peroxisome proliferators 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and Wy-14643. Toxicol Pathol 29, 440–450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pritchard, J.B. & Bend, J.R. (1984). Mechanisms controlling the renal excretion of xenobiotics in fish—effects of chemical-structure. Drug Metab Rev 15, 655–671.Google Scholar
Resende, A.D., Lobo-da-Cunha, A., Malhão, F., Franquinho, F., Monteiro, R.A.F. & Rocha, E. (2010). Histological and stereological characterization of brown trout (salmo truta f. fario) trunk kidney. Microsc Microanal 16, 677–687.Google Scholar
Rocha, E., Lobo-da-Cunha, A., Monteiro, R.A.F., Silva, M.W. & Oliveira, M.H. (1999). A stereological study along the year on the hepatocytic peroxisomes of brown trout (salmo trutta). J Submicrosc Cytol Pathol 31, 91–105.Google Scholar
Schrader, M., Costello, J.L., Godinho, L.F., Azadi, A.S. & Islinger, M. (2016). Proliferation and fission of peroxisomes—an update. Biochim Biophys Acta 1863, 971–983.Google Scholar
Stefanini, S., Serafini, B., Nardacci, R., Vecchioli, S.F., Moreno, S. & Sartori, C. (1995). Morphometric analysis of liver and kidney peroxisomes in lactating rats and their pups after treatment with the peroxisomal proliferator Di-(2-Ethylexyl)Phthalate. Biol Cell 85, 167–176.Google Scholar
Sterio, D.C. (1984). The unbiased estimation of number and sizes of arbitrary particles using the dissector. J Microsc 134, 127–136.Google Scholar
Veenhuis, M. & Bonga, S.E.W. (1979). Cytochemical-localization of catalase and several hydrogen peroxide-producing oxidases in the nucleoids and matrix of rat-liver peroxisomes. Histochem J 11, 561–572.Google Scholar
Veenhuis, M. & Wendelaarbonga, S.D. (1977). Cytochemical demonstration of catalase and D-amino-acid oxidase in microbodies of teleost kidney cells. Histochem J 9, 171–181.Google Scholar
Veranic, P. & Pipan, N. (1992). The relationship between endoplasmic-reticulum and peroxisomes in fish hepatocytes during estradiol stimulation and after cessation of vitellogenesis. Period Biol 94, 29–34.Google Scholar
Wanders, R.J.A. (2014). Metabolic functions of peroxisomes in health and disease. Biochimie 98, 36–44.Google Scholar
Waterham, H.R., Ferdinandusse, S. & Wanders, R.J. (2015). Human disorders of peroxisome metabolism and biogenesis. Biochim Biophys Acta 1863, 922–933.Google Scholar
Weibel, E.R. (1979). Stereological Methods. Vol. I Practical Methods for Biological Morphometry. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Weibel, E.R. & Gomez, D.M. (1962). A principle for counting tissue structures on random sections. J Appl Physiol 17, 343–348.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
White, K.E. & Bilous, R.W. (2004). Estimation of podocyte number: A comparison of methods. Kidney Int 66, 663–667.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Resende supplementary material

Table S1

Download Resende supplementary material(File)
File 28.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Resende supplementary material

Table S2

Download Resende supplementary material(File)
File 21.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Resende supplementary material

Table S3

Download Resende supplementary material(File)
File 21.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Resende supplementary material

Table S4

Download Resende supplementary material(File)
File 22.3 KB