TABLE 2.
IC50 and RBA Values for Competitive Ligands for the Trout Liver ER
Treatment | Abbreviation | IC50 (M)a | RBA (%)b | Classificationc |
Xenoestrogens | ||||
Estradiol | E2 | 1.39 × 10−8 | 100 | S |
Diethylstilbestrol | DES | 7.59 × 10−9 | 186 | S |
Ethynylestradiol | EE2 | 5.89 × 10−8 | 23.7 | S |
Genistein | GEN | 1.01 × 10−6 | 1.38 | M |
4-Nonylphenol | NP | 8.42 × 10−4 | 0.0017 | W |
Indole-3-carbinol | I3C | 4.81 × 10−3 | 0.0003 | W |
3,3′-Diindolylmethane | DIM | 1.76 × 10−3 | 0.0008 | W |
Perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids | ||||
Perfluoropentanoic acid | PFPA | 2.89 × 10−3 | 0.0005 | VW |
Perfluorohexanoic acid | PFHxA | 1.22 × 10−3 | 0.0011 | W |
Perfluoroheptanoic acid | PFHpA | 1.78 × 10−3 | 0.0008 | VW |
Perfluorooctanoic acid | PFOA | 1.82 × 10−3 | 0.0008 | VW |
Perfluorononanoic acid | PFNA | 1.63 × 10−3 | 0.0009 | VW |
Perfluorodecanoic acid | PFDA | 2.34 × 10−4 | 0.0060 | W |
Perfluoroundecanoic acid | PFUnDA | 1.01 × 10−3 | 0.0014 | W |
Perfluorododecanoic acid | PFDoDA | 6.51 × 10−4 | 0.0021 | W |
Perfluorotridecanoic acid | PFTrDA | 5.22 × 10−4 | 0.0027 | W |
Perfluorotetradecanoic acid | PFTDA | L | L | |
Perfluoroalkyl sulfonates | ||||
Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid potassium salt | PFOS | 2.01 × 10−4 | 0.0069 | W |
Perfluorodecane sulfonic acid ammonium salt | PFDS | 1.52 × 10−4 | 0.0092 | W |
Fluorotelomers | ||||
6:2 Fluorotelomer alcohol | 6:2FtOH | ND | ND | |
8:2 Fluorotelomer alcohol | 8:2FtOH | ND | ND | |
8:2 Fluorotelomer acrylate | 8:2FtOAcr | ND | ND |
Note. ND, no significant displacement; L, less than 50% displacement.
IC50 is the competitor concentration that causes 50% displacement of [3H]-E2.
RBA values were calculated by normalizing IC50 values to that of E2 which was set at 100%.
Letters indicate classification of RBA values into four broad groups indicating calculated affinity for trout liver ER as follows: S, strong binding (RBA > 10%); M, moderate binding (RBA 0.1–10%); W, weak binding (RBA 0.001–0.1%); and VW, very weak binding (RBA < 0.001%).