Next Article in Journal
Leptospira spp. in Rodents and Shrews in Germany
Next Article in Special Issue
In Vitro Interactions between 17β-Estradiol and DNA Result in Formation of the Hormone-DNA Complexes
Previous Article in Journal
Enhancement of Arsenic Trioxide-Mediated Changes in Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (IPS)
Previous Article in Special Issue
First Year Growth in Relation to Prenatal Exposure to Endocrine Disruptors — A Dutch Prospective Cohort Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 11
Issue 7
10.3390/ijerph110707537
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Bisphenol-A: Epigenetic Reprogramming and Effects on Reproduction and Behavior

by
Guergana Mileva
1,*,
Stephanie L. Baker
1,
Anne T.M. Konkle
1,2 and
Catherine Bielajew
1
1
School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, 136 Jean Jacques Lussier, Vanier Hall, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
2
Interdisciplinary School of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, 25 University Private, Thompson Hall, Ottawa, ON K1N 6X1, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014, 11(7), 7537-7561; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110707537
Submission received: 11 June 2014 / Revised: 10 July 2014 / Accepted: 14 July 2014 / Published: 22 July 2014
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Endocrine Disruptors and Human Health)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Bisphenol A (BPA) is a synthetic compound used in the production of many polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins. It is one of the most widely produced chemicals in the world today and is found in most canned goods, plastics, and even household dust. Exposure to BPA is almost universal: most people have measurable amounts of BPA in both urine and serum. BPA is similar in structure to estradiol and can bind to multiple targets both inside and outside the nucleus, in effect acting as an endocrine disruptor. Research on BPA exposure has accelerated in the past decade with findings suggesting that perinatal exposure to BPA can negatively impact both male and female reproduction, create alterations in behavior, and act as a carcinogen. BPA can have both short term and long term effects with the latter typically occurring through epigenetic mechanisms such as DNA methylation. This review will draw on both human and animal studies in an attempt to synthesize the literature and examine the effects of BPA exposure on reproduction, behavior, and carcinogenesis with a focus on the potential epigenetic mechanisms by which it acts.

1. Introduction

Bisphenol-A (BPA) is one of the most ubiquitous synthetic chemical compounds in production today, with over three million tons produced annually [1]. BPA belongs to the bisphenol group of compounds that possess two hydroxyphenyl groups. Because of this chemical structure, BPA is extensively used in the production of polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins. Common products made with BPA include water bottles, water piping, the lining of tin cans, toys, and thermal receipt paper (for review of BPA in polycarbonates see [2]). The extensive use of BPA means that environmental exposure is very common. Recent research indicates that in this everyday exposure BPA acts as an endocrine disrupting compound (EDC) even in low doses (for a review see [3]) [4].
BPA was originally synthesized in the late 19th century and subsequently promoted as a synthetic estrogen (xenoestrogen) after its estrogenic effects were discovered in the early 20th century [5]. At that time a structural analog of BPA, diethylstilbestrol (DES), replaced BPA in clinical use as it was found to be a much more potent synthetic estrogen [6]. DES was prescribed to millions of women around the world to prevent miscarriages. The daughters of these women went on to have a much higher likelihood of developing clear-cell adenocarcinoma of the vagina as well as general defects of the genital tract [7]. DES was consequently removed from the market and its production was completely halted in the late 1990s. Since it took nearly 20 years following prenatal exposure for the discovery of the malignant effects of DES, this raises the question of whether low level, chronic exposure to other EDCs, such as BPA, may also have deleterious effects which may only be detected on a longer time course and are harder to observe.
The goal of this article is to broadly cover the current literature regarding BPA modes and levels of exposure, as well as its actions at the cellular level. Further, the effects of BPA exposure during development with specific focus on behavior and reproduction will be addressed. Throughout this paper, the connection between BPA-induced epigenetic modifications will be discussed whenever possible.

2. Environmental Contamination

Direct release of BPA into the environment occurs during manufacturing and processing activities via release into air, water, soil, and through underground injection. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the worldwide estimated release of BPA into the environment currently exceeds one million pounds per year [8]. Not surprisingly, BPA has been detected in indoor air, dust, soil, water (dinking, surface, and ground), sediment, municipal and industrial waste, and food (for a review see [9]). BPA also accounts for the majority of estrogenic activity detected in landfill leaching in North America [10] and Japan [11] based on tests on human cell lines. Under aerobic conditions, BPA appears to biodegrade quickly, as compared to other bisphenols, but under anaerobic conditions it does not degrade or does so very slowly [12]. However, recent studies suggest that certain strains (i.e., Bacillus) are able to effectively biodegrade BPA at high rates (10 mg/dm3) under anaerobic conditions [13]. Therefore, even though promising research suggests that BPA can be biodegraded by certain types of bacteria, fungi, and algae [9], there is potential for environmental accumulation due to the substantial quantities released into the environment.

3. Human BPA Exposure

The primary source of BPA exposure in humans is thought to occur through ingestion; however, transdermal absorption [14] and inhalation of contaminated airborne dust [1] are probable secondary routes. BPA can readily leach into food sources through the epoxy resin linings of canned goods and those which have been in polycarbonate packaging [15,16]. While migration rates of BPA into water are higher at increased temperatures [15,17] significant migration can also occur at room temperature [18,19]. Because canned goods are both inexpensive and convenient, their use is very common in developed countries and a significant source of ingested BPA.
Reliable methods have been developed to quantify BPA concentrations in human urine, serum, and plasma (for a review see [20]). Large biomonitoring studies have found that more than 90% of U.S. [21] and Canadian participants [22] have detectable levels of BPA in their urine. A study of rural vs. urban girls in Egypt showed no difference in urinary BPA concentration which was attributed to the use of plastic containers to store food in both areas [23]. This also suggests that the gap between rural and urban living is closing and that BPA can be widely found in both areas. Carwile and colleagues reported that participants given canned soup for five consecutive days had their urine BPA levels increase more than 100% while no differences were found in participants who consumed fresh soup [24]. Conversely, urine levels of BPA significantly decreased after just three days of eating fresh foods that were not canned or packaged in plastic [25], indicating that a large number of prepared foods contain measurable amounts of BPA.
In the U.S., of 267 food products—such as beverages, dairy products, fats and oils, fish and seafood, cereals, fruits, vegetables and miscellaneous others—analyzed for BPA or its analogues, 75% were found to contain quantifiable levels of BPA, Bisphenol S (BPS) or Bisphenol F (BPF) [26]. In this study, condiments and other preserved foods had the highest level of bisphenols while fruits and beverages contained the least. In China, of 289 food samples from nine cities, 78% had bisphenols, with BPA being the most prevalent in over 60% of the samples [27]. In Canada, of 154 food samples, only 36% had quantifiable amounts of BPA, with the highest found in canned fish (101 ng/g) and corn (83.7 ng/g) [28]. The leaching of BPA and other chemicals are routinely underestimated or simply not stringently assessed [29]. The above research not only illustrates the ubiquitous nature of BPA as an environmental toxicant, it also explains why most of the general population has some measurable amount of BPA in their bodily fluids (i.e., urine, serum, saliva etc.) [30].
According to the U.S. EPA, the current lowest-observable-adverse-effect level (LOAEL) of BPA is 50 mg/kg bodyweight per day. This level is based on a series of early studies measuring BPA induced weight change over generations in dogs, rats, and cats in the mid-1980s. To our knowledge, this level has remained unchanged since 1993 when it was first established, even in the face of mounting evidence that lower levels of BPA have physiological effects. In 2006, the European Food Safety Authority set their tolerable daily intake of BPA at 0.05 mg/kg body weight/day, significantly lower than that of the U.S. One reason that policy change in the U.S. is lagging could be because of early toxicokinetic studies of BPA and their findings. In addition, many of the biomonitoring studies mentioned above appear to be overlooked by the governing bodies that regulate BPA [30]. For this reason, a large part of the scientific community studying BPA and its adverse effects is in agreement that these toxicokinetic studies should not be the only ones used in policy making [31,32].

4. BPA Metabolism and Cellular Mechanism of Action

The toxicokinetics of BPA were first assessed in humans by Volkel and colleagues who administered a low dose (5 mg) of BPA orally to nine participants. They found that once ingested, BPA was quickly metabolized in the liver into bisphenol A-glucuronide, a highly soluble metabolite that is then eliminated through urine. It appeared that since bisphenol A-glucuronide has no hormonal activity, oral BPA metabolism deactivates the estrogenic activity of BPA and allows very little “free”, unconjugated, BPA to bind to estrogen receptors (ERs) [33]. This contention corroborated past studies in rats with orally administered BPA having the lowest bioavailability in comparison with intraperitoneal and subcutaneous injection of BPA [34]. In sum, early studies of human BPA metabolism suggested that BPA would have little to no effects in the body because of its rapid metabolism. However, there is mounting evidence that free BPA, even at low doses, can act as a potent EDC with lasting consequences.
Since BPA is a well-known xenoestrogen, its effects on estrogen receptors (ERs) have been extensively studied. ERs are important in the human body as they can carry out both genomic and non-genomic signal transduction (for a review see [35]). Genomic signal transduction is a slow process by which ERs regulate transcription and in turn gene expression. The non-genomic actions of ERs are very rapid and involve the modification of regulatory proteins. Until recently, endocrine disruption induced by BPA has been considered weak because compared to estradiol (E2), BPA concentrations need to be 1000 fold higher to induce the classic nuclear estrogen receptors ERα and ERβ [36]. Taken together, these studies propagated the view that exposure to BPA had little impact due to its low binding affinity to ERs and the fact that it is quickly inactivated and excreted.
In contrast, more recent basic research examining BPA exposure shows stark differences from the toxicokinetic studies. Animal studies examining perinatal BPA exposure have since reported that even doses significantly lower than those set by the U.S. EPA (50 mg/kg body weight/day) can cause significant changes in the brain and development (for review see [37]).
There are multiple reasons as to why previous human and animal studies have failed to report the low dose effects of BPA exposure. First, although the binding affinity of BPA for ERα and ERβ—the two most studied ERs—is very low, it is now clear BPA can and does bind multiple other targets within the nucleus and on the cell membrane and that the concentration of BPA needed to activate these targets is much lower than for ERα and ERβ (for a review see [38,39,40]. In fact, even at low doses, BPA can activate nuclear estrogen related receptor (ERR) γ and interact with the ligand domain of classic ERs [41]. BPA also binds to non-classical membrane estrogen receptors (mERs) creating rapid nongenomic changes that are insensitive to antiestrogens [42]. Furthermore, in pancreatic-α and -β cells, the binding sites of mERs show equal affinity for BPA, DES, and E2 with a concentration of 10−9 M BPA able to influence Ca2+ concentration oscillations [42,43]. In rats, BPA-induced alterations of ER expression in the hypothalamus occur in a sexually dimorphic manner [44]. This indicates that while the affinity of BPA for classic ER receptors is low, they readily bind to estrogen-related receptors. Binding of specific ERs by BPA metabolites can be at a rate 100 times higher than BPA itself [45]. BPA is also an antagonist to human androgen receptors (AR) as it binds to ARs, effectively inhibiting endogenous androgens [46,47] and can suppresses thyroid hormone receptor transcription in cell cultures thereby disrupting thyroid hormone signaling [39]. These findings all shed light on the widespread effects of BPA illustrating that unconjugated BPA can affect multiple signal transduction pathways.
A second reason why previous studies have not found low dose effects of BPA exposure may be because most of these focused primarily on the deactivated metabolite, bisphenol A-glucuronide. However, the amount of unconjugated, active BPA in human serum is around 4.4 µg/L indicating that not all BPA is metabolized [48]. BPA is transformed through oxidation into a variety of metabolites, many of which may have more significant physiological impact than the compound itself [49]. For instance, the BPA metabolite bisphenol A 3,4-quinone can form covalent bonds with and damage DNA, in turn contributing to hepatotoxicity [50]. The chemical mixtures, metabolites, and compounds produced when BPA in municipal drinking water mixes with chlorine have also been studied. At low concentrations (10−15–10−7 M), these chlorinated or sulfonated types of BPA can affect the binding affinity of ERα to other proteins [51]. BPS also acts as an EDC and can lead to alterations in cell death, proliferation, and mutagenicity [52,53]. This has important implications for human health, as it is commonly used as a replacement of BPA in plastic drinking bottles.
Furthermore, EDCs, like the natural hormones they frequently mimic, show non-monotonic dose response curves [54]. These non-monotonic relationships—defined as nonlinear dose-effect curves—can complicate the results obtained for effects of low and high dose administration. For instance, BPA exposure shows an inverted U-shaped dose response when female mice weight is assessed, while the opposite is true in male mice [55]. Specifically, low dose (1 µg/mL) exposure to BPA significantly increases female adipose tissue weight, while high dose (10 µg/mL) exposure has no effect. Conversely, weight was only affected at high doses of BPA exposure in male mice in the same study. This not only highlights the sexually dimorphic effects of BPA exposure, but also the non-linear dose response curves typical of EDCs. These non-monotonic relationships indicate that the effects of low and high dose exposure are not always constant between outcome measures and that studying only high dose responses, as is common in toxicological studies, is not sufficient.
Finally, many studies look only at global physical characteristics such as weight when assessing the effects of BPA exposure. More recently, a risk assessment study undertaken by the Biochemical Toxicology Division of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has also reported that perinatal exposure to BPA causes adverse effects such as decreased pre- and post-natal weight only at very high doses (100,000 and 300,000 µg/kg body weight per day), significantly higher than the regulatory guidelines have set [56]. However, this may overlook more subtle changes in behavior or in the brain which were not measured.
Taken together there is now compelling evidence that BPA and its metabolites can not only bind to multiple target ERs, ERRs, mERs and ARs but that they can alter steroid synthesis and induce sexually dimorphic changes in the mammalian brain at doses significantly lower than that set by the EPA.

5. BPA and Epigenetic Modifications

In both clinical and preclinical research, BPA exposure has been linked to a variety of diseases. These include cardiovascular disease [57], diabetes [58], obesity [59,60], reproductive disorders [61], breast cancer [62], prostate cancer [63], hepatotoxicity [64], impaired synaptic remodeling (for review see [65]), and even depressive-like behavior in mice [66] and rats [67]. The mechanism by which BPA influences these diseases is not known, but evidence suggests that epigenetic processes play a role (for review see [68]).
Epigenetics is a large field of study regarding the molecular processes responsible for heritable and stable changes in gene expression that do not involve changes to the DNA sequence [69]. In essence, even though the DNA sequence remains fixed, the expression or silencing of genes and gene regions can be achieved via a variety of epigenetic mechanisms and in response to a variety of environmental exposures. DNA methylation is among the most studied mechanism of epigenetic regulation. Methylation is the process of adding a methyl group to the cytosine nucleotide within a cytosine-phosphate-guanine sequence of DNA, referred to as a CpG site. This can act to silence gene expression in that region of DNA [70].
In sexually reproducing organisms, when an embryo is fertilized it undergoes extensive germline reprogramming which “resets” or demethylates the DNA, creating a “clean slate” [71]. Whereas most DNA methylation is erased, some epigenetic marks can be retained across generations through a process called transgenerational epigenetic inheritance [72]. Though the mechanisms are as yet unclear, it appears that maternal or paternal phenotypes can be passed on via stable changes to offspring gene expression (for review see [73]) and that these stable epigenetic modifications can be influenced by environmental stimuli [74]. Furthermore, the mechanisms responsible for DNA methylation are known to respond to external stimuli during the perinatal period and could result in disease [75]. In other words, the external environment can trigger epigenetic change in parents that can then be passed on to the offspring in a non-random fashion. This epigenetic inheritance has been proposed as a potential mechanism in rapid adaptive evolution [74,76]. However, environmental contaminants such as EDCscan also affect both DNA methylation and epigenetic marks creating long lasting changes through subsequent generations (reviewed in [77,78]).
Environmental contaminants such as mercury, lead, arsenic, and BPA have all been shown to alter DNA methylation in humans [79,80]. Hypermethylation was found in tail tissue of mouse offspring perinatally exposed to very low doses of BPA (5 ng/kg) [81]. In neonatal rats, BPA exposure has been linked to altered DNA methylation at key cell signaling genes, increasing the likelihood of developing precancerous prostatic lesions in adulthood [82,83]. Neonatal BPA exposure causes alterations to the epigenome in the frontal brain of mice [84]. These studies highlight the importance of analyzing the effects of BPA exposure in human and non-human mammalian health. The mechanisms through which BPA exposure influences pathology also need to be examined in depth.

6. BPA Exposure During Development

The growing organism is most susceptible to the negative consequences associated with endocrine disruption. Fetuses, infants, and young children thus represent a high risk group that is exposed to environmental contaminants at higher levels than adults due to differences in diet (formula feeding from bottles), behavior (such as mouthing plastic toys), and metabolic and physiological characteristics [85]. The perinatal period is one of the most important periods of neurodevelopment in which the external environment plays a significant role in programming and re-programming gene expression.
In pregnant rats, the liver’s ability to metabolize free BPA to its deactivated state (BPA-glucuronide) is attenuated to 60% compared with that of non-pregnant female rats [86]. These animal studies indicate that BPA is not excreted as readily during pregnancy and might create a chronic level of BPA exposure. One human study supports this hypothesis: urine BPA concentration increased by 26% of baseline (or compared with pre-pregnancy levels) in women when they became pregnant [87].
Studies of pregnant women, and in some cases their fetuses, have indicated that exposure to BPA is nearly ubiquitous, especially in developed countries. A fairly small Australian study (N = 26) showed measurable amounts of BPA in 85% of their sample of pregnant women with a median of 2.41 µg/L [88]. In a Canadian study of pregnant women, BPA levels ranged from non-detectable to almost 5 ng/mL, with this value highly correlated to that of their fetus [89]. Another large study of pregnant women in Canada between 2008–2011 found that 88% had measurable BPA levels in their urine and that increasing maternal age, not smoking, and higher education and income correlated with a decrease in BPA levels [90]. These demographic correlations with BPA levels seem to be consistent with findings from other countries such as Spain [91] and the U.S. [92].
Free BPA has also been detected in early and late pregnancy serum [93], maternal plasma at birth, and placental tissue [94]. A placental perfusion experiment using human full term placenta, indicated rapid transfer of an environmentally relevant, low dose (10 ng/mL) of BPA from the maternal placental unit to the fetal unit [95]. BPA in the fetal compartment began to rise within 10 min and reached 27% of the maternal dose within 180 min, the monitoring endpoint [95]. A similar study supports rapid BPA transfer in human perfused placenta, placental explants and in skin diffusion experiments [96]. It is now clear that most pregnant women have measurable amounts of BPA in their bodies, a concern not only to them, but also to their growing fetuses.

7. Perinatal BPA Exposure—Reproduction

Environmental contaminants can have long lasting effects on fertility. It is well established that exposure to low doses of BPA can trigger changes in both male and female reproductive physiology. In one of the first studies of its kind, vom Saal and colleagues found that the male offspring of pregnant mice who had been fed BPA at 20 ng/g bodyweight (20 parts per billion) had decreased sperm production, while those fed 2 ng/g bodyweight (2 parts per billion) had a permanent increase in the pheromone-producing preputial glands. The effects of BPA exposure on reproductive organs can have evolutionary consequences by decreasing individual fitness, and affecting population dynamics [97]. Globally, there is worry that human fertility rates and fecundity are declining, especially in developed countries [98], but measuring these rates is very difficult and imprecise [99]. While many factors might influence these declining rates—including increased rates of obesity, decreased sperm count, and delayed pregnancy—the effect of xenoestrogens such as BPA cannot be ignored. Both animal work and human correlational data looking at urine BPA concentration in association with both male and female fertility measures are outlined below.

7.1. Non-Human Mammalian Fertility

In male animals, exposure to environmental contaminants can impact the reproductive organs and in turn fertility (for a review see [100]). For instance, the common EDCs vinclozolin (an anti-androgenic fungicide) and methoxychlor (an estrogenic pesticide) have been examined for their activity on male fertility. In rats, transient exposure to methoxyclor (200 mg/kg/day) during gestation was reported to increase male infertility via epigenetic reprogramming in all subsequent generations (F1 to F4) [101]. Gestational exposure to vinclozolin (100 mg/kg/day) was found to cause long lasting effects in reproductive organs (prostate, testes) as well as immune and kidney function in males from F1 to F4 [102]. These were some of the first studies to find a transgenerational effect of EDCs on fertility and disease. In a series of studies by Manikkam, epigenetic changes in the F3 offspring were found after gestational exposure of the F0 dam to a pesticide mixture [103], dioxin [104], and a plastic mixture containing BPA [105] created significant sperm epimutations in F3 animals.
Research in rats has shown that BPA exposure and its effects on reproductive hormones can cause permanent changes in the entire male hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis [106]. Perinatal exposure to BPA can create transgenerational changes in the number of testicular steroid hormone receptors, sperm motility, and sperm count (for a review see [107]). The fact that F1, F2, and F3 offspring all show these alterations is indicative of permanent changes to the germline. These epigenetic changes could be due to DNA methylation abnormalities in the testis of the adult offspring [108]. However, it is not only perinatal BPA exposure that can affect the male rat germ cells. A recent study by Tiwari and Vanage (2013) showed that exposing adult male rats to 5 mg/kg bodyweight BPA over a period of six days will create dominant lethal mutations in germ cells. These lead to reduced sperm production and motility [109]. It is therefore important to examine the epigenetic changes induced by BPA exposure not only in early life but also in adulthood as both appear to be influential in male fertility.
Environmental contaminants do not only affect male fertility. In female animals, exposure to a common compound found in the insect repellent called N,N-Diethyl-3-methylbenzamide (DEET) and dioxins promotes transgenerational early-onset puberty [110]. In utero exposure to low doses of BPA (20 µg/kg) in mice causes vaginal opening to occur significantly earlier than in control animals [111] whereas exposure during adulthood significantly alters both uterine weight and pregnancy rates (54% treated vs. 100% controls) [112]. Both fertility and fecundity were significantly decreased when pregnant mice were administered 25 µg/kg of BPA subcutaneously through osmotic pumps [113]. Finally, neonatal exposure to high doses of BPA (500 µg/50 mL) has been reported to alter ovarian morphology, increasing the number of cysts and creating a polycystic ovarian syndrome phenotype in female animals [114]. The mechanism by which BPA can affect female reproductive capacity is still unclear, but research suggests that BPA can disrupt early oocyte formation through its actions on ERβ [115].
In primates, Calhoun et al. showed that exposing pregnant rhesus macaques to BPA (400 µg/kg/day) during the third trimester, but not before, can alter transcription and expression of developmental genes. These changes in gene expression are likely to affect uterine function later in life [116]. BPA exposure late in gestation can not only decrease genome-wide DNA methylation in the placenta (at 50 µg/kg exposure) but also disrupts imprinted gene expression [117]. These alterations in DNA methylation, and in turn gene expression, are indicators of BPA-induced epigenetic reprogramming that can lead to infertility, decreased fecundity, and affect development as a whole. Notably, maternal supplementation with folic acid in mice appears to reverse BPA-induced epigenetic modification in offspring [118]. Taken together, these animal studies provide extensive evidence of the negative effects of low-dose perinatal or adult BPA exposure on fertility.

7.2. Human Fertility

Exposure to EDCs can also negatively impact men’s reproductive health (for review see [119]). To our knowledge no studies exist showing a causal relationship between BPA exposure and decreased fertility in humans. Much research has focused on the correlation between urine and serum BPA and hormone concentrations. In a Danish study by Lassen et al., 98% of men (median age 19 years) tested had measurable amounts of BPA in their urine with a median concentration of 3.25 ng/mL [120]. Men in the highest quartile for urine BPA had significantly higher levels of E2, testosterone, and luteinizing hormone as compared to those in the lowest quartile. Moreover, these men also had a significant decrease in sperm motility [120]. Urinary BPA concentration showed a modest, though not significant, relationship with a reduction in sperm count and altered morphology [121].
In women, serum concentrations of BPA and Bisphenol B are associated with an increased likelihood of endometriosis [122], although these findings are not consistent [123]. Other studies link blood BPA levels with polycystic ovarian syndrome [124] and suggest that the positive correlation between androgen concentration and serum BPA could be a cause [125]. Increasing urine BPA concentration has also been associated with a higher implantation failure, decreased ovarian response, a decrease in blastocyst formation, and recurrent miscarriage [126,127,128]. Preliminary evidence in a small sample of pregnant women in Mexico also suggests that there may be a positive correlation between urine BPA concentration and premature birth [129].
Multiple associations have been found between BPA concentration in serum and urine in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). These findings corroborate other measures assessing BPA’s effect on fertility. For example, a significant relationship between the number of oocytes retrieved, peak E2 levels, and increasing BPA in urine has been found in women seeking fertility treatment [130]. In a similar study, while no relationship was found between the number of oocytes retrieved and serum BPA concentration, there was an association between serum BPA concentration and a reduced E2 response during IVF [131]. E2 is typically an indicator of follicular response during IVF and these BPA-induced changes in E2 may render gonadotropin fertility treatments ineffective. While the above is based on correlational data, these links can give fertility treatment clinics another biomarker to examine and potentially control for to make IVF more effective. The nature of human studies is such that drawing conclusions about the effect of BPA exposure on fertility is often not possible, given the wide range of contradictory results. However, a combined approach using animal, toxicokinetic, endocrinology, and epidemiological studies can help to better understand the true effects of BPA exposure.

8. Perinatal BPA Exposure—Behavior

8.1. Non-Human Mammalian Behavior

Since BPA can bind to multiple sex hormone receptors it has the potential to modify endogenous hormone concentrations. Even slight changes in the concentrations of hormones can create alterations in the development of sexually dimorphic brain nuclei and the behaviors they underlie. Some of the well-characterized sexually dimorphic nuclei are located in the hypothalamus and are differentially affected by circulating steroid hormones such as E2 and testosterone which also affect behavioral outcomes (for a review see [132]). In particular, early life treatment with exogenous E2 or testosterone increases apoptosis in the anteroventral periventricular nucleus, a structure many times larger in females, resulting in a masculinized female brain [133,134]. Since BPA passes freely from mother to child through the placenta and breast milk, and because the perinatal period is crucial for brain development, BPA exposure during this time might disrupt the normal process of masculinization/feminization of the brain and in turn disrupt behavior. In fact, rats perinatally exposed to BPA (1.5 mg/kg/day) show altered sexual differentiation of the locus coeruleus, a nucleus directly involved in the stress response [135]. In rats, BPA-induced alterations of ER expression also occur in the hypothalamus in a sexually dimorphic manner [44].
Maternal exposure to EDCs has been linked to changes in sexual behavior in both male and female rats. Early studies of the effects of the estrogenic pesticides DDT and methoxychlor and DES on behavioral outcomes in male mice found that prenatal exposure to low doses of all three compounds increased their territorial behavior [136]. Exposing rats to 40 µg/kg/day of BPA during pregnancy and lactation also increased defensive behavior in male offspring while increasing sexual motivation and receptivity in female offspring [137]. In utero BPA exposure in mice eliminated sex-typical novelty responses and exploration in the open-field test in adulthood [138] and masculinized play behavior in female rats [139]. Low dose gestational exposure (20 µg/day) to BPA can also create transgenerational epigenetic changes in social behavior by decreasing the mRNA for vasopressin and oxytocin, two peptides important in the expression of social behavior [140].
BPA exposure has also been linked to sexually dimorphic alterations in anxiety-like behavior and general motor activity [141]. In rat behavioral research, female animals typically show less anxiety and depressive-like behaviors in measures such as the elevated plus maze and forced swim tests, respectively [142,143]. Research by Jones and Watson found that perinatal exposure of Long-Evans rats to BPA at 5 µg/kg bodyweight, but not above, eliminates sex differences in the elevated plus maze and forced swim test between males and females. This is indicative of BPA’s actions on emotional behavior in a dose dependent and sexually dimorphic manner proposed to be through a demasculization of typical male behavior [144]. Notably, BPA exposure did not affect learning and memory in the Morris water maze [144]. However, an increase in depressive-like behavior in the forced swim after low dose prenatal BPA exposure (~15 µg/kg/day) was reported in male, but not female, Wistar rats [67]. These alterations in anxiety and depressive-like behaviors could be mediated by circulating corticosterone or changes in glucocorticoid receptors (GRs) in key brain structures such as the hippocampus. For instance, in utero exposure to low dose BPA (40 µg/kg body weight) in male and female Wistar rats significantly increases only female serum corticosterone levels while reducing GR levels in the hippocampus [145]. However, following a mild stressor there were sexually dimorphic changes in both serum corticosterone and GR receptors as well as general spatial recognition impairments in both male and female BPA exposed animals [145].
The findings in behavioral studies can be influenced by the use of a wide variety of strains, methods, and species. There are known sex and strain differences in depressive-like behavior in rats exposed to depressogenic stimuli associated with the chronic mild stress procedure, for example. This indicates that both the response to and outcome of stressful stimuli is sexually dimorphic and dependent on strain [146,147]. Therefore, it is important to determine if there are sexually dimorphic changes in brain and behavior after BPA exposure in multiple strains of animals. Taken together, the above studies show that BPA-mediated changes in the brain can create long lasting behavioral alterations even at doses significantly lower than those delineated by the EPA (50 mg/kg bodyweight).

8.2. Human Behavior

It is often difficult to study the effects of contaminants through the human lifespan, especially with regards to behavior. This is due to the large number of possible confounding factors and the relative variability in human subjects. For this reason, there are few studies on the effects of BPA exposure on human behavior. However, a small number of longitudinal studies have been able to provide evidence for the potential negative effects of early life BPA exposure while cross-sectional approaches have evaluated urine BPA concentration with direct behavioral observation. These studies are correlational in nature and often present with multiple limitations but are a necessary next step in examining the effects of BPA on human behavior.
In a recent longitudinal study, maternal BPA urine concentration during pregnancy was linked with increased anxiety and depression in boys, but not girls, at age seven [148] and is consistent with previous studies [149]. However, studies from different groups show that prenatal BPA exposure affects girls, but not boys, in emotionality and relational domains [150,151]. In cross-sectional analyses, BPA concentrations in childhood spot urine are associated with increased internalizing and attention problems in boys and externalizing and conduct problems in girls at age seven [148]. Furthermore, a study observing children ages 8–11 found a positive association between BPA levels in urine and anxiety and depression as measured using the Child Behavior Checklist [152]. In the same study, a negative association was found between urinary BPA concentration and total learning quotient using the Learning Disability Evaluation Scale; however, no gender differences were observed. While the variation in the findings across studies is puzzling, it is clear that perinatal and childhood BPA exposure may alter behavior, perhaps in a sexually dimorphic manner, which agrees with the results of animal studies.

9. BPA-Induced Carcinogenesis

Exposure to EDCs during the perinatal period can create deleterious epigenetic modifications and, in some cases, trigger carcinogenesis [153]. It is now clear that xenoestrogens can and do negatively affect the fetus, exemplified by the multigenerational carcinogenic effects of DES. Mounting evidence suggests that BPA should also be classified as a carcinogen within the definitions established by the EPA. Notably, perinatal BPA exposure has recently been found to act as a carcinogen in the liver, increasing the incidence of hepatic tumors in 10 month old mice [154]. While the mechanism remains largely unknown, new research suggests that BPA exposure can influence motility in rat liver epithelial cells perhaps thought the induction of lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) G protein-coupled receptors [155]. The multiple isoforms of the LPA receptor are important in many cellular functions including cell proliferation and migration (For review see [156]) and are also implicated in tumorigenesis and resistance to anti-cancer drugs in certain cancer cell lines [157,158]). Taken together, it appears that BPA can affect LPA receptors important in key cellular functions and in turn may be one of the underlying mechanisms in BPA-induced tumorigenesis.
However, because of its effect as a xenoestrogen, the carcinogenic effects of BPA have been studied most often with respect to reproductive organs such as the mammary glands, ovaries and testes. Perinatal exposure to BPA at environmentally relevant levels in rats has been linked to mammary carcinogenesis in the rat dams (for review see [159]) and mammary gland adenocarcinoma in the female offspring as early as post natal day 90 [160]. Surprisingly, morphological changes in the mammary gland were also found in male mice offspring, implying that fetal BPA exposure could be a cause of gynecomastia, or the enlargement of mammary tissue seen in males [161].
Extrapolating to a human model, the above studies suggest that BPA’s effects as a xenoestrogen can alter the morphogenesis of the fetal mammary gland with the potential to create breast cancer in females and gynecomastia in males through epigenetic gene expression modification. The mechanism by which BPA might influence breast cancer in humans is so far unknown; however, Fernandez et al. (2012) showed that in human breast cancer cell lines, BPA increases DNA repair gene expression including BRCA1 and BRCA2. They concluded that women who have mutations in these two genes may be particularly susceptible to the negative effects of environmental BPA exposure [162].
BPA exposure has also been linked to the development of prostate carcinogenesis in both rats [163] and human prostate epithelium [63]. In 2014, an epigenetic mechanism for BPA-induced prostate cancer was proposed that involves increased prostate stem-progenitor cell self-renewal as well as upregulated expression of stem-cell related genes [63]. In other words, human prostate stem-progenitor cells appear to be directly affected by BPA. While other mechanisms may exist, there is no doubt that the epigenetic effects of BPA on the binding, synthesis, and metabolism of natural estrogens plays a large role. These studies illustrate the potent effects of EDCs, with special focus on BPA during the perinatal period and provide solid evidence that BPA can be classified as a carcinogen based on its role in both breast and prostate carcinogenesis.

10. BPA Regulatory Debate

Many endocrinologists believe that governments should use the precautionary principle to create stringent regulation in the face of multiple studies showing the low dose effects of EDCs in both animal and human research [4]. The precautionary principle itself is controversial, as it states that harmful substances should be strictly regulated even if there are gaps in the scientific knowledge about them. Up to this point, many countries including France, Sweden, and Turkey have banned the use of BPA in children’s food containers but, to our knowledge, only Canada has both banned BPA from baby bottles and declared BPA a toxic substance. According to Vandenberg (2011), by declaring BPA a toxic substance, Health Canada has invoked the precautionary principle, but more stringent legislation is yet to follow [164].
Even in the face of mounting evidence, the effects of low dose BPA exposure still remain controversial impeding regulatory policy. The debate on BPA safety, and its eventual resolution, will have wide ranging consequences not only on public health and private industry but also on the global economy. This is partially due to the ubiquitous nature of BPA in worldwide plastic and resin production and the public safety information supplied by plastics companies [165]. Michaels reported that when the American Plastics Council hired the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis to review animal studies evaluating the low-dose effects of BPA, they inspected 19 papers and found no consistent effects. This was highly contrasted by government funded research in which 94 out of 104 studies found significant low-dose effects [166]. Michaels further illustrated the concept of “manufactured uncertainty” using the BPA safety debate as an example. Manufactured uncertainty is defined as the ability of corporations to create public doubt in the scientific evidence behind regulatory policy [166]. Because BPA grosses approximately $6 billion USD a year, plastics companies often hire their own experts to inform policy makers by discrediting independent research [167]. For instance, 60 of the 80 studies which were to be used in regulatory policy were considered flawed by a plastics company expert [167]. In addition, weight-of-evidence studies conducted in 2006 and updated in 2009 reviewed a large number of studies and found no low-dose effects of BPA; there may be conflict of interest issues that underlie these interpretations [168,169,170].
Independent research in the late 1990s attempted to replicate findings from the vom Saal laboratory which showed significant low dose effects of BPA exposure [171,172]. However, these studies found no effect of low dose BPA and DES on prostate size and sexual maturation in both rats and mice [173,174,175]. The methodology employed by these early studies to look at low-dose effects of BPA has been highly scrutinized, potentially invalidating studies which found effects and those which did not [176]. Since then, the methodology used to measure BPA has been standardized by multiple researchers from different institutes. Furthermore, the National Institute of Environmental Health Studies, in association with the National Toxicology Program has set up funding for researchers working on low dose effects of BPA which so far include 223 studies between 2010 and February 2014 [177]. This paints a positive picture of collaboration between government researchers and regulatory agencies for the future of BPA research.

11. Conclusions

In this article the adverse effects of BPA are highlighted with a special focus on reproduction, behavior, and carcinogenesis and the potential epigenetic mechanisms by which BPA acts. There is strong evidence that the estrogenic and anti-androgenic effects of BPA can negatively impact brain and reproductive organ development by binding to multiple receptor targets both in and out of the nucleus. From altering the normal trajectory of sexual dimorphic brain development to reducing sperm count and motility, it is clear that low-dose BPA exposure, especially during the perinatal period, can have significant negative outcomes in later life. While correlational research shows links between BPA exposure and human behavior and disease, more research is needed to determine if the mechanisms by which BPA induces changes in non-human animals can be extrapolated to humans.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada for support of our work.

Author Contributions

Guergana Mileva and Stephanie L. Baker prepared this manuscript based on extensive discussions, input and review from Anne T.M. Konkle and Catherine Bielajew.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Vandenberg, L.N.; Hauser, R.; Marcus, M.; Olea, N.; Welshons, W.V. Human exposure to bisphenol A (BPA). Reprod. Toxicol. 2007, 24, 139–177. [Google Scholar]
  2. Hoekstra, E.J.; Simoneau, C. Release of bisphenol A from polycarbonate: A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2013, 53, 386–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Fenichel, P.; Chevalier, N.; Brucker-Davis, F. Bisphenol A: An endocrine and metabolic disruptor. Ann. Endocrinol. 2013, 74, 211–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Diamanti-Kandarakis, E.; Bourguignon, J.P.; Giudice, L.C.; Hauser, R.; Prins, G.S.; Soto, A.M.; Zoeller, R.T.; Gore, A.C. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals: An endocrine society scientific statement. Endocr. Rev. 2009, 30, 293–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Dodds, E.; Lawson, W. Synthetic oestrogenic agents without the phenanthrene nucleus. Nature 1936, 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Dodds, E.; Lawson, W.; Novel, R. Biological effects of the synthetic oestrogenic substance 4:4′-dihydroxy-a: B-dimethylstilbene. Lancet 1938, 234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Herbst, A.L.; Kurman, R.J.; Scully, R.E. Vaginal and cervical abnormalities after exposure to stilbestrol in utero. Obstet. Gynecol. 1972, 40, 287–298. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bisphenol A (BPA). Action Plan Summary. Available online: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/actionplans/bpa.html (accessed on 14 July 2014).
  9. Michalowicz, J. Bisphenol A—Sources, toxicity and biotransformation. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2014, 37, 738–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Coors, A.; Jones, P.D.; Giesy, J.P.; Ratte, H.T. Removal of estrogenic activity from municipal waste landfill leachate assessed with a bioassay based on reporter gene expression. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, 3430–3434. [Google Scholar]
  11. Kawagoshi, Y.; Fujita, Y.; Kishi, I.; Fukunaga, I. Estrogenic chemicals and estrogenic activity in leachate from municipal waste landfill determined by yeast two-hybrid assay. J. Environ. Monit. 2003, 5, 269–274. [Google Scholar]
  12. Ike, M.; Chen, M.Y.; Danzl, E.; Sei, K.; Fujita, M. Biodegradation of a variety of bisphenols under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Water Sci. Technol. 2006, 53, 153–159. [Google Scholar]
  13. Li, G.; Zu, L.; Wong, P.K.; Hui, X.; Lu, Y.; Xiong, J.; An, T. Biodegradation and detoxification of bisphenol A with one newly-isolated strain Bacillus sp. GZB: Kinetics, mechanism and estrogenic transition. Bioresour. Technol. 2012, 114, 224–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zalko, D.; Jacques, C.; Duplan, H.; Bruel, S.; Perdu, E. Viable skin efficiently absorbs and metabolizes bisphenol A. Chemosphere 2011, 82, 424–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Brotons, J.A.; Olea-Serrano, M.F.; Villalobos, M.; Pedraza, V.; Olea, N. Xenoestrogens released from lacquer coatings in food cans. Environ. Health Perspect. 1995, 103, 608–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wagner, M.; Oehlmann, J. Endocrine disruptors in bottled mineral water: Total estrogenic burden and migration from plastic bottles. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2009, 16, 278–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Takao, Y.; Lee, H.C.; Kohra, S.; Arizono, K. Release of bishphenol A from food can lining upon heating. J. Health Sci. 2002, 48, 331–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Le, H.H.; Carlson, E.M.; Chua, J.P.; Belcher, S.M. Bisphenol A is released from polycarbonate drinking bottles and mimics the neurotoxic actions of estrogen in developing cerebellar neurons. Toxicol. Lett. 2008, 176, 149–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Howdeshell, K.L.; Peterman, P.H.; Judy, B.M.; Taylor, J.A.; Orazio, C.E.; Ruhlen, R.L.; Vom Saal, F.S.; Welshons, W.V. Bisphenol A is released from used polycarbonate animal cages into water at room temperature. Environ. Health Perspect. 2003, 111, 1180–1187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Dekant, W.; Volkel, W. Human exposure to bisphenol A by biomonitoring: Methods, results and assessment of environmental exposures. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2008, 228, 114–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Calafat, A.M.; Ye, X.; Wong, L.Y.; Reidy, J.A.; Needham, L.L. Exposure of the U.S. population to bisphenol A and 4-tertiary-octylphenol: 2003–2004. Environ. Health Perspect. 2008, 116, 39–44. [Google Scholar]
  22. Bushnik, T.; Haines, D.; Levallois, P.; Levesque, J.; van Oostdam, J.; Viau, C. Lead and bisphenol A concentrations in the Canadian population. Health Rep. 2010, 21, 7–18. [Google Scholar]
  23. Nahar, M.S.; Soliman, A.S.; Colacino, J.A.; Calafat, A.M.; Battige, K.; Hablas, A.; Seifeldin, I.A.; Dolinoy, D.C.; Rozek, L.S. Urinary bisphenol A concentrations in girls from rural and urban Egypt: A pilot study. Environ. Health 2012, 11, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Carwile, J.L.; Ye, X.; Zhou, X.; Calafat, A.M.; Michels, K.B. Canned soup consumption and urinary bisphenol A: A randomized crossover trial. JAMA 2011, 306, 2218–2220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Rudel, R.A.; Gray, J.M.; Engel, C.L.; Rawsthorne, T.W.; Dodson, R.E.; Ackerman, J.M.; Rizzo, J.; Nudelman, J.L.; Brody, J.G. Food packaging and bisphenol A and bis(2-ethyhexyl) phthalate exposure: Findings from a dietary intervention. Environ. Health Perspect. 2011, 119, 914–920. [Google Scholar]
  26. Liao, C.; Kannan, K. Concentrations and profiles of bisphenol A and other bisphenol analogues in foodstuffs from the United States and their implications for human exposure. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 4655–4662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Liao, C.; Kannan, K. A survey of bisphenol A and other bisphenol analogues in foodstuffs from nine cities in China. Food Addit. Contam. 2014, 31, 319–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Cao, X.L.; Perez-Locas, C.; Dufresne, G.; Clement, G.; Popovic, S.; Beraldin, F.; Dabeka, R.W.; Feeley, M. Concentrations of bisphenol A in the composite food samples from the 2008 Canadian total diet study in Quebec City and dietary intake estimates. Food Addit. Contam. 2011, 28, 791–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Muncke, J. Endocrine disrupting chemicals and other substances of concern in food contact materials: An updated review of exposure, effect and risk assessment. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2011, 127, 118–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Vandenberg, L.N.; Chahoud, I.; Heindel, J.J.; Padmanabhan, V.; Paumgartten, F.J.; Schoenfelder, G. Urinary, circulating, and tissue biomonitoring studies indicate widespread exposure to bisphenol A. Environ. Health Perspect. 2010, 118, 1055–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Vandenberg, L.N.; Hunt, P.A.; Myers, J.P.; vom Saal, F.S. Human exposures to bisphenol A: Mismatches between data and assumptions. Rev. Environ. Health 2013, 28, 37–58. [Google Scholar]
  32. Hengstler, J.G.; Foth, H.; Gebel, T.; Kramer, P.J.; Lilienblum, W.; Schweinfurth, H.; Volkel, W.; Wollin, K.M.; Gundert-Remy, U. Critical evaluation of key evidence on the human health hazards of exposure to bisphenol A. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2011, 41, 263–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Volkel, W.; Colnot, T.; Csanady, G.A.; Filser, J.G.; Dekant, W. Metabolism and kinetics of bisphenol A in humans at low doses following oral administration. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2002, 15, 1281–1287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Pottenger, L.H.; Domoradzki, J.Y.; Markham, D.A.; Hansen, S.C.; Cagen, S.Z.; Waechter, J.M., Jr. The relative bioavailability and metabolism of bisphenol A in rats is dependent upon the route of administration. Toxicol. Sci. 2000, 54, 3–18. [Google Scholar]
  35. Bjornstrom, L.; Sjoberg, M. Mechanisms of estrogen receptor signaling: Convergence of genomic and nongenomic actions on target genes. Mol. Endocrinol. 2005, 19, 833–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kuiper, G.G.; Carlsson, B.; Grandien, K.; Enmark, E.; Haggblad, J.; Nilsson, S.; Gustafsson, J.A. Comparison of the ligand binding specificity and transcript tissue distribution of estrogen receptors alpha and beta. Endocrinology 1997, 138, 863–870. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kitraki, E. BPA Effects In Vivo: Evidence from Animal Studies; Eliades, T., Eliades, G., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany; Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 89–114. [Google Scholar]
  38. Alonso-Magdalena, P.; Ropero, A.B.; Soriano, S.; Garcia-Arevalo, M.; Ripoll, C.; Fuentes, E.; Quesada, I.; Nadal, A. Bisphenol-A acts as a potent estrogen via non-classical estrogen triggered pathways. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 2012, 355, 201–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sheng, Z.G.; Tang, Y.; Liu, Y.X.; Yuan, Y.; Zhao, B.Q.; Chao, X.J.; Zhu, B.Z. Low concentrations of bisphenol A suppress thyroid hormone receptor transcription through a nongenomic mechanism. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2012, 259, 133–142. [Google Scholar]
  40. Wozniak, A.L.; Bulayeva, N.N.; Watson, C.S. Xenoestrogens at picomolar to nanomolar concentrations trigger membrane estrogen receptor-alpha-mediated Ca2+ fluxes and prolactin release in GH3/B6 pituitary tumor cells. Environ. Health Perspect. 2005, 113, 431–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Tohme, M.; Prud’homme, S.M.; Boulahtouf, A.; Samarut, E.; Brunet, F.; Bernard, L.; Bourguet, W.; Gibert, Y.; Balaguer, P.; Laudet, V. Estrogen-related receptor gamma is an in vivo receptor of bisphenol A. FASEB J. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Nadal, A.; Ropero, A.B.; Laribi, O.; Maillet, M.; Fuentes, E.; Soria, B. Nongenomic actions of estrogens and xenoestrogens by binding at a plasma membrane receptor unrelated to estrogen receptor alpha and estrogen receptor beta. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2000, 97, 11603–11608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Alonso-Magdalena, P.; Laribi, O.; Ropero, A.B.; Fuentes, E.; Ripoll, C.; Soria, B.; Nadal, A. Low doses of bisphenol A and diethylstilbestrol impair Ca2+ signals in pancreatic alpha-cells through a nonclassical membrane estrogen receptor within intact islets of Langerhans. Environ. Health Perspect. 2005, 113, 969–977. [Google Scholar]
  44. Rebuli, M.E.; Cao, J.; Sluzas, E.; Delclos, K.B.; Camacho, L.; Lewis, S.M.; Vanlandingham, M.M.; Patisaul, H.B. Investigation of the effects of subchronic low dose oral exposure to bisphenol A (BPA) and ethinyl estradiol (EE) on estrogen receptor expression in the juvenile and adult female rat hypothalamus. Toxicol. Sci. 2014, 140, 190–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Nakamura, S.; Tezuka, Y.; Ushiyama, A.; Kawashima, C.; Kitagawara, Y.; Takahashi, K.; Ohta, S.; Mashino, T. Ipso substitution of bisphenol A catalyzed by microsomal cytochrome P450 and enhancement of estrogenic activity. Toxicol. Lett. 2011, 203, 92–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Xu, L.C.; Sun, H.; Chen, J.F.; Bian, Q.; Qian, J.; Song, L.; Wang, X.R. Evaluation of androgen receptor transcriptional activities of bisphenol A, octylphenol and nonylphenol in vitro. Toxicology 2005, 216, 197–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Teng, C.; Goodwin, B.; Shockley, K.; Xia, M.; Huang, R.; Norris, J.; Merrick, B.A.; Jetten, A.M.; Austin, C.P.; Tice, R.R. Bisphenol A affects androgen receptor function via multiple mechanisms. Chem. Biol. Interact. 2013, 203, 556–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Vom Saal, F.; Akingbemi, B.; Belcher, S.; Birnbaum, L.; Crain, D.; Eriksen, M.; Farabollini, F.; Guillette, L., Jr.; Hauser, R.; Heindel, J.; et al. Chapel Hill bisphenol A expert panel consensus statement: Integration of mechanisms, effects in animals and potential to impact human health at current levels of exposure. Reprod. Toxicol. 2007, 24, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Kovacic, P. How safe is bisphenol A? Fundamentals of toxicity: Metabolism, electron transfer and oxidative stress. Med. Hypotheses 2010, 75, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Atkinson, A.; Roy, D. In vivo DNA adduct formation by bisphenol A. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 1995, 26, 60–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Vinas, R.; Goldblum, N.; Watson, C. Rapid estrogenic signaling activities of the modified (chlorinated, sulfonated, and glucuronidated) endocrine disruptor bisphenol A. Endocr. Disruptors 2013, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Vinas, R.; Watson, C.S. Bisphenol S disrupts estradiol-induced nongenomic signaling in a rat pituitary cell line: Effects on cell functions. Environ. Health Perspect. 2013, 121, 352–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Fic, A.; Zegura, B.; Dolenc, M.S.; Filipic, M.; Peterlin Masic, L. Mutagenicity and DNA damage of bisphenol A and its structural analogues in HepG2 cells. Arh. Hig. Rada. Toksikol. 2013, 64, 3–14. [Google Scholar]
  54. Vandenberg, L.N.; Colborn, T.; Hayes, T.B.; Heindel, J.J.; Jacobs, D.R., Jr.; Lee, D.H.; Shioda, T.; Soto, A.M.; vom Saal, F.S.; Welshons, W.V.; et al. Hormones and endocrine-disrupting chemicals: Low-dose effects and nonmonotonic dose responses. Endocr. Rev. 2012, 33, 378–455. [Google Scholar]
  55. Miyawaki, J.; Sakayama, K.; Kato, H.; Yamamoto, H.; Masuno, H. Perinatal and postnatal exposure to bisphenol A increases adipose tissue mass and serum cholesterol level in mice. J. Atheroscler. Thromb. 2007, 14, 245–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Delclos, K.B.; Camacho, L.; Lewis, S.M.; Vanlandingham, M.M.; Latendresse, J.R.; Olson, G.R.; Davis, K.J.; Patton, R.E.; da Costa, G.G.; Woodling, K.A.; et al. Toxicity evaluation of bisphenol A administered by gavage to Sprague Dawley rats from gestation day 6 through postnatal day 90. Toxicol. Sci. 2014, 139, 174–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Lang, I.A.; Galloway, T.S.; Scarlett, A.; Henley, W.E.; Depledge, M.; Wallace, R.B.; Melzer, D. Association of urinary bisphenol A concentration with medical disorders and laboratory abnormalities in adults. JAMA 2008, 300, 1303–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Alonso-Magdalena, P.; Morimoto, S.; Ripoll, C.; Fuentes, E.; Nadal, A. The estrogenic effect of bisphenol A disrupts pancreatic beta-cell function in vivo and induces insulin resistance. Environ. Health Perspect. 2006, 114, 106–112. [Google Scholar]
  59. Carwile, J.L.; Michels, K.B. Urinary bisphenol A and obesity: NHANES 2003–2006. Environ. Res. 2011, 111, 825–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Heindel, J.J.; vom Saal, F.S. Role of nutrition and environmental endocrine disrupting chemicals during the perinatal period on the aetiology of obesity. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 2009, 304, 90–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Caserta, D.; Di Segni, N.; Mallozzi, M.; Giovanale, V.; Mantovani, A.; Marci, R.; Moscarini, M. Bisphenol A and the female reproductive tract: An overview of recent laboratory evidence and epidemiological studies. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2014, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Durando, M.; Kass, L.; Piva, J.; Sonnenschein, C.; Soto, A.M.; Luque, E.H.; Munoz-de-Toro, M. Prenatal bisphenol A exposure induces preneoplastic lesions in the mammary gland in Wistar rats. Environ. Health Perspect. 2007, 115, 80–86. [Google Scholar]
  63. Prins, G.S.; Hu, W.Y.; Shi, G.B.; Hu, D.P.; Majumdar, S.; Li, G.; Huang, K.; Nelles, J.L.; Ho, S.M.; Walker, C.L.; et al. Bisphenol A promotes human prostate stem-progenitor cell self-renewal and increases in vivo carcinogenesis in human prostate epithelium. Endocrinology 2014, 155, 805–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Hassan, Z.K.; Elobeid, M.A.; Virk, P.; Omer, S.A.; ElAmin, M.; Daghestani, M.H.; AlOlayan, E.M. Bisphenol A induces hepatotoxicity through oxidative stress in rat model. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Hajszan, T.; Leranth, C. Bisphenol A interferes with synaptic remodeling. Front. Neuroendocrinol. 2010, 31, 519–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Xu, X.; Hong, X.; Xie, L.; Li, T.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Zhang, G.; Liu, X. Gestational and lactational exposure to bisphenol-A affects anxiety- and depression-like behaviors in mice. Horm. Behav. 2012, 62, 480–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Fujimoto, T.; Kubo, K.; Aou, S. Prenatal exposure to bisphenol A impairs sexual differentiation of exploratory behavior and increases depression-like behavior in rats. Brain Res. 2006, 1068, 49–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Wolstenholme, J.T.; Rissman, E.F.; Connelly, J.J. The role of bisphenol A in shaping the brain, epigenome and behavior. Horm. Behav. 2011, 59, 296–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Berger, S.L.; Kouzarides, T.; Shiekhattar, R.; Shilatifard, A. An operational definition of epigenetics. Genes Dev. 2009, 23, 781–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Newell-Price, J.; Clark, A.J.; King, P. DNA methylation and silencing of gene expression. Trends Endocrinol. MeTable 2000, 11, 142–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Hackett, J.A.; Surani, M.A. Beyond DNA: Programming and inheritance of parental methylomes. Cell 2013, 153, 737–739. [Google Scholar]
  72. Grossniklaus, U.; Kelly, W.G.; Ferguson-Smith, A.C.; Pembrey, M.; Lindquist, S. Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance: How important is it? Nat. Rev. Genet. 2013, 14, 228–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Heard, E.; Martienssen, R.A. Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance: Myths and mechanisms. Cell 2014, 157, 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Chong, S.; Whitelaw, E. Epigenetic germline inheritance. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 2004, 14, 692–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Jirtle, R.L.; Skinner, M.K. Environmental epigenomics and disease susceptibility. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2007, 8, 253–262. [Google Scholar]
  76. Schlichting, C.D.; Wund, M.A. Phenotypic plasticity and epigenetic marking: An assessment of evidence for genetic accommodation. Evolution 2014, 68, 656–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Skinner, M.K.; Manikkam, M.; Guerrero-Bosagna, C. Epigenetic transgenerational actions of endocrine disruptors. Reprod. Toxicol. 2011, 31, 337–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Skinner, M.K.; Manikkam, M.; Guerrero-Bosagna, C. Epigenetic transgenerational actions of environmental factors in disease etiology. Trends Endocrinol. Metab. 2010, 21, 214–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Hanna, C.W.; Bloom, M.S.; Robinson, W.P.; Kim, D.; Parsons, P.J.; vom Saal, F.S.; Taylor, J.A.; Steuerwald, A.J.; Fujimoto, V.Y. DNA methylation changes in whole blood is associated with exposure to the environmental contaminants, mercury, lead, cadmium and bisphenol A, in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF. Hum. Reprod. 2012, 27, 1401–1410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Reichard, J.F.; Schnekenburger, M.; Puga, A. Long term low-dose arsenic exposure induces loss of DNA methylation. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2007, 352, 188–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Anderson, O.S.; Nahar, M.S.; Faulk, C.; Jones, T.R.; Liao, C.; Kannan, K.; Weinhouse, C.; Rozek, L.S.; Dolinoy, D.C. Epigenetic responses following maternal dietary exposure to physiologically relevant levels of bisphenol A. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 2012, 53, 334–342. [Google Scholar]
  82. Ho, S.M.; Tang, W.Y.; Belmonte de Frausto, J.; Prins, G.S. Developmental exposure to estradiol and bisphenol A increases susceptibility to prostate carcinogenesis and epigenetically regulates phosphodiesterase type 4 variant 4. Cancer Res. 2006, 66, 5624–5632. [Google Scholar]
  83. Prins, G.S.; Birch, L.; Tang, W.Y.; Ho, S.M. Developmental estrogen exposures predispose to prostate carcinogenesis with aging. Reprod. Toxicol. 2007, 23, 374–382. [Google Scholar]
  84. Yaoi, T.; Itoh, K.; Nakamura, K.; Ogi, H.; Fujiwara, Y.; Fushiki, S. Genome-wide analysis of epigenomic alterations in fetal mouse forebrain after exposure to low doses of bisphenol A. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2008, 376, 563–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Moya, J.; Bearer, C.F.; Etzel, R.A. Children’s behavior and physiology and how it affects exposure to environmental contaminants. Pediatrics 2004, 113, 996–1006. [Google Scholar]
  86. Inoue, H.; Tsuruta, A.; Kudo, S.; Ishii, T.; Fukushima, Y.; Iwano, H.; Yokota, H.; Kato, S. Bisphenol A glucuronidation and excretion in liver of pregnant and nonpregnant female rats. Drug Metab. Dispos. 2005, 33, 55–59. [Google Scholar]
  87. Mahalingaiah, S.; Meeker, J.D.; Pearson, K.R.; Calafat, A.M.; Ye, X.; Petrozza, J.; Hauser, R. Temporal variability and predictors of urinary bisphenol A concentrations in men and women. Environ. Health Perspect. 2008, 116, 173–178. [Google Scholar]
  88. Callan, A.C.; Hinwood, A.L.; Heffernan, A.; Eaglesham, G.; Mueller, J.; Odland, J.O. Urinary bisphenol A concentrations in pregnant women. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2013, 216, 641–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Aris, A. Estimation of bisphenol A (BPA) concentrations in pregnant women, fetuses and nonpregnant women in Eastern Townships of Canada. Reprod. Toxicol. 2014, 45, 8–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Arbuckle, T.E.; Davis, K.; Marro, L.; Fisher, M.; Legrand, M.; LeBlanc, A.; Gaudreau, E.; Foster, W.G.; Choeurng, V.; Fraser, W.D. MIREC study group phthalate and bisphenol A exposure among pregnant women in Canada—Results from the MIREC study. Environ. Int. 2014, 68, 55–65. [Google Scholar]
  91. Casas, M.; Valvi, D.; Luque, N.; Ballesteros-Gomez, A.; Carsin, A.E.; Fernandez, M.F.; Koch, H.M.; Mendez, M.A.; Sunyer, J.; Rubio, S.; et al. Dietary and sociodemographic determinants of bisphenol A urine concentrations in pregnant women and children. Environ. Int. 2013, 56, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Barrett, E.S.; Sathyanarayana, S.; Janssen, S.; Redmon, J.B.; Nguyen, R.H.; Kobrosly, R.; Swan, S.H. TIDES study team environmental health attitudes and behaviors: Findings from a large pregnancy cohort study. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2014, 176, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Ikezuki, Y.; Tsutsumi, O.; Takai, Y.; Kamei, Y.; Taketani, Y. Determination of bisphenol A concentrations in human biological fluids reveals significant early prenatal exposure. Hum. Reprod. 2002, 17, 2839–2841. [Google Scholar]
  94. Schonfelder, G.; Wittfoht, W.; Hopp, H.; Talsness, C.E.; Paul, M.; Chahoud, I. Parent bisphenol A accumulation in the human maternal-fetal-placental unit. Environ. Health Perspect. 2002, 110, 703–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Balakrishnan, B.; Henare, K.; Thorstensen, E.B.; Ponnampalam, A.P.; Mitchell, M.D. Transfer of bisphenol A across the human placenta. Amer. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Morck, T.J.; Sorda, G.; Bechi, N.; Rasmussen, B.S.; Nielsen, J.B.; Ietta, F.; Rytting, E.; Mathiesen, L.; Paulesu, L.; Knudsen, L.E. Placental transport and in vitro effects of bisphenol A. Reprod. Toxicol. 2010, 30, 131–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Vom Saal, F.S.; Cooke, P.S.; Buchanan, D.L.; Palanza, P.; Thayer, K.A.; Nagel, S.C.; Parmigiani, S.; Welshons, W.V. A physiologically based approach to the study of bisphenol A and other estrogenic chemicals on the size of reproductive organs, daily sperm production, and behavior. Toxicol. Ind. Health 1998, 14, 239–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Bonde, J.P.; Olsen, J. Interpreting trends in fecundity over time. BMJ 2008, 336, 339–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Sallmen, M.; Weinberg, C.R.; Baird, D.D.; Lindbohm, M.L.; Wilcox, A.J. Has human fertility declined over time?: Why we may never know. Epidemiology 2005, 16, 494–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Hauser, R.; Sokol, R. Science linking environmental contaminant exposures with fertility and reproductive health impacts in the adult male. Fert. Steril. 2008, 89, 59–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Anway, M.D.; Cupp, A.S.; Uzumcu, M.; Skinner, M.K. Epigenetic transgenerational actions of endocrine disruptors and male fertility. Science 2005, 308, 1466–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Anway, M.D.; Leathers, C.; Skinner, M.K. Endocrine disruptor vinclozolin induced epigenetic transgenerational adult-onset disease. Endocrinology 2006, 147, 5515–5523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Manikkam, M.; Tracey, R.; Guerrero-Bosagna, C.; Skinner, M.K. Pesticide and insect repellent mixture (permethrin and DEET) induces epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of disease and sperm epimutations. Reprod. Toxicol. 2012, 34, 708–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Manikkam, M.; Tracey, R.; Guerrero-Bosagna, C.; Skinner, M.K. Dioxin (TCDD) induces epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of adult onset disease and sperm epimutations. PLoS One 2012, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Manikkam, M.; Tracey, R.; Guerrero-Bosagna, C.; Skinner, M.K. Plastics derived endocrine disruptors (BPA, DEHP and DBP) induce epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of obesity, reproductive disease and sperm epimutations. PLoS One 2013, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Ramos, J.G.; Varayoud, J.; Kass, L.; Rodriguez, H.; Costabel, L.; Munoz-De-Toro, M.; Luque, E.H. Bisphenol A induces both transient and permanent histofunctional alterations of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis in prenatally exposed male rats. Endocrinology 2003, 144, 3206–3215. [Google Scholar]
  107. Salian, S.; Doshi, T.; Vanage, G. Perinatal exposure of rats to bisphenol A affects fertility of male offspring—An overview. Reprod. Toxicol. 2011, 31, 359–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Doshi, T.; Mehta, S.S.; Dighe, V.; Balasinor, N.; Vanage, G. Hypermethylation of estrogen receptor promoter region in adult testis of rats exposed neonatally to bisphenol A. Toxicology 2011, 289, 74–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Tiwari, D.; Vanage, G. Mutagenic effect of bisphenol A on adult rat male germ cells and their fertility. Reprod. Toxicol. 2013, 40, 60–68. [Google Scholar]
  110. Manikkam, M.; Guerrero-Bosagna, C.; Tracey, R.; Haque, M.M.; Skinner, M.K. Transgenerational actions of environmental compounds on reproductive disease and identification of epigenetic biomarkers of ancestral exposures. PLoS One 2012, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Honma, S.; Suzuki, A.; Buchanan, D.L.; Katsu, Y.; Watanabe, H.; Iguchi, T. Low dose effect of in utero exposure to bisphenol A and diethylstilbestrol on female mouse reproduction. Reprod. Toxicol. 2002, 16, 117–122. [Google Scholar]
  112. Al-Hiyasat, A.S.; Darmani, H.; Elbetieha, A.M. Leached components from dental composites and their effects on fertility of female mice. Eur. J. Oral Sci. 2004, 112, 267–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Cabaton, N.J.; Wadia, P.R.; Rubin, B.S.; Zalko, D.; Schaeberle, C.M.; Askenase, M.H.; Gadbois, J.L.; Tharp, A.P.; Whitt, G.S.; Sonnenschein, C.; et al. Perinatal exposure to environmentally relevant levels of bisphenol A decreases fertility and fecundity in CD-1 mice. Environ. Health Perspect. 2011, 119, 547–552. [Google Scholar]
  114. Fernandez, M.; Bourguignon, N.; Lux-Lantos, V.; Libertun, C. Neonatal exposure to bisphenol A and reproductive and endocrine alterations resembling the polycystic ovarian syndrome in adult rats. Environ. Health Perspect. 2010, 118, 1217–1222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Susiarjo, M.; Hassold, T.J.; Freeman, E.; Hunt, P.A. Bisphenol A exposure in utero disrupts early oogenesis in the mouse. PLoS Genet. 2007, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Calhoun, K.C.; Padilla-Banks, E.; Jefferson, W.N.; Liu, L.; Gerrish, K.E.; Young, S.L.; Wood, C.E.; Hunt, P.A.; Vandevoort, C.A.; Williams, C.J. Bisphenol A exposure alters developmental gene expression in the fetal rhesus macaque uterus. PLoS One 2014, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Susiarjo, M.; Sasson, I.; Mesaros, C.; Bartolomei, M.S. Bisphenol A exposure disrupts genomic imprinting in the mouse. PLoS Genet. 2013, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Dolinoy, D.C.; Huang, D.; Jirtle, R.L. Maternal nutrient supplementation counteracts bisphenol A-induced DNA hypomethylation in early development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 13056–13061. [Google Scholar]
  119. Meeker, J.D. Exposure to environmental endocrine disrupting compounds and men’s health. Maturitas. 2010, 66, 236–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Lassen, T.H.; Frederiksen, H.; Jensen, T.K.; Petersen, J.H.; Joensen, U.N.; Main, K.M.; Skakkebaek, N.E.; Juul, A.; Jorgensen, N.; Andersson, A.M. Urinary bisphenol A levels in young men: Association with reproductive hormones and semen quality. Environ. Health Perspect. 2014, 122, 478–484. [Google Scholar]
  121. Meeker, J.D.; Ehrlich, S.; Toth, T.L.; Wright, D.L.; Calafat, A.M.; Trisini, A.T.; Ye, X.; Hauser, R. Semen quality and sperm DNA damage in relation to urinary bisphenol A among men from an infertility clinic. Reprod. Toxicol. 2010, 30, 532–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Cobellis, L.; Colacurci, N.; Trabucco, E.; Carpentiero, C.; Grumetto, L. Measurement of bisphenol A and bisphenol B levels in human blood sera from healthy and endometriotic women. Biomed. Chromatogr. 2009, 23, 1186–1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Itoh, H.; Iwasaki, M.; Hanaoka, T.; Sasaki, H.; Tanaka, T.; Tsugane, S. Urinary bisphenol-A concentration in infertile Japanese women and its association with endometriosis: A cross-sectional study. Environ. Health. Prev. Med. 2007, 12, 258–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Kandaraki, E.; Chatzigeorgiou, A.; Livadas, S.; Palioura, E.; Economou, F.; Koutsilieris, M.; Palimeri, S.; Panidis, D.; Diamanti-Kandarakis, E. Endocrine disruptors and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS): Elevated serum levels of bisphenol A in women with PCOS. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2011, 96, 480–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Takeuchi, T.; Tsutsumi, O.; Ikezuki, Y.; Takai, Y.; Taketani, Y. Positive relationship between androgen and the endocrine disruptor, bisphenol A, in normal women and women with ovarian dysfunction. Endocr. J. 2004, 51, 165–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Ehrlich, S.; Williams, P.L.; Missmer, S.A.; Flaws, J.A.; Berry, K.F.; Calafat, A.M.; Ye, X.; Petrozza, J.C.; Wright, D.; Hauser, R. Urinary bisphenol A concentrations and implantation failure among women undergoing in vitro fertilization. Environ. Health Perspect. 2012, 120, 978–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Ehrlich, S.; Williams, P.L.; Missmer, S.A.; Flaws, J.A.; Ye, X.; Calafat, A.M.; Petrozza, J.C.; Wright, D.; Hauser, R. Urinary bisphenol A concentrations and early reproductive health outcomes among women undergoing IVF. Hum. Reprod. 2012, 27, 3583–3592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Sugiura-Ogasawara, M.; Ozaki, Y.; Sonta, S.; Makino, T.; Suzumori, K. Exposure to bisphenol A is associated with recurrent miscarriage. Hum. Reprod. 2005, 20, 2325–2329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Cantonwine, D.; Meeker, J.D.; Hu, H.; Sanchez, B.N.; Lamadrid-Figueroa, H.; Mercado-Garcia, A.; Fortenberry, G.Z.; Calafat, A.M.; Tellez-Rojo, M.M. Bisphenol A exposure in Mexico City and risk of prematurity: A pilot nested case control study. Environ. Health 2010, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Mok-Lin, E.; Ehrlich, S.; Williams, P.L.; Petrozza, J.; Wright, D.L.; Calafat, A.M.; Ye, X.; Hauser, R. Urinary bisphenol A concentrations and ovarian response among women undergoing IVF. Int. J. Androl. 2010, 33, 385–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Bloom, M.S.; Kim, D.; Vom Saal, F.S.; Taylor, J.A.; Cheng, G.; Lamb, J.D.; Fujimoto, V.Y. Bisphenol A exposure reduces the estradiol response to gonadotropin stimulation during in vitro fertilization. Fertil. Steril. 2011, 96, 672–677. [Google Scholar]
  132. Mileva, G.; Bielajew, C.; Konkle, A.T. Estrous cycle: Physiology, endocrinology and role in breeding and reproductive management. In Sex Differences in Physiology and Behaviour: The Importance of Hormones and Rearing Environment; Durand, L., Ed.; Nova Science Publisher: Hauppauge, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  133. Arai, Y.; Murakami, S.; Nishizuka, M. Androgen enhances neuronal degeneration in the developing preoptic area: Apoptosis in the anteroventral periventricular nucleus (AVPvN-POA). Horm. Behav. 1994, 28, 313–319. [Google Scholar]
  134. Murakami, S.; Arai, Y. Neuronal death in the developing sexually dimorphic periventricular nucleus of the preoptic area in the female rat: Effect of neonatal androgen treatment. Neurosci. Lett. 1989, 102, 185–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Kubo, K.; Arai, O.; Ogata, R.; Omura, M.; Hori, T.; Aou, S. Exposure to bisphenol A during the fetal and suckling periods disrupts sexual differentiation of the locus coeruleus and of behavior in the rat. Neurosci. Lett. 2001, 304, 73–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Vom Saal, F.S.; Nagel, S.C.; Palanza, P.; Boechler, M.; Parmigiani, S.; Welshons, W.V. Estrogenic pesticides: Binding relative to estradiol in MCF-7 cells and effects of exposure during fetal life on subsequent territorial behaviour in male mice. Toxicol. Lett. 1995, 77, 343–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Farabollini, F.; Porrini, S.; Seta, D.D.; Bianchi, F.; Dessi-Fulgheri, F. Effects of perinatal exposure to bisphenol A on sociosexual behavior of female and male rats. Environ. Health Perspect. 2002, 110, 409–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Gioiosa, L.; Fissore, E.; Ghirardelli, G.; Parmigiani, S.; Palanza, P. Developmental exposure to low-dose estrogenic endocrine disruptors alters sex differences in exploration and emotional responses in mice. Horm. Behav. 2007, 52, 307–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Dessi-Fulgheri, F.; Porrini, S.; Farabollini, F. Effects of perinatal exposure to bisphenol A on play behavior of female and male juvenile rats. Environ. Health Perspect. 2002, 110, 403–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Wolstenholme, J.T.; Edwards, M.; Shetty, S.R.; Gatewood, J.D.; Taylor, J.A.; Rissman, E.F.; Connelly, J.J. Gestational exposure to bisphenol A produces transgenerational changes in behaviors and gene expression. Endocrinology 2012, 153, 3828–3838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Farabollini, F.; Porrini, S.; Dessi-Fulgherit, F. Perinatal exposure to the estrogenic pollutant bisphenol A affects behavior in male and female rats. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 1999, 64, 687–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Zimmerberg, B.; Farley, M.J. Sex differences in anxiety behavior in rats: Role of gonadal hormones. Physiol. Behav. 1993, 54, 1119–1124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Alonso, S.J.; Castellano, M.A.; Afonso, D.; Rodriguez, M. Sex differences in behavioral despair: Relationships between behavioral despair and open field activity. Physiol. Behav. 1991, 49, 69–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Jones, B.A.; Watson, N.V. Perinatal BPA exposure demasculinizes males in measures of affect but has no effect on water maze learning in adulthood. Horm. Behav. 2012, 61, 605–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Poimenova, A.; Markaki, E.; Rahiotis, C.; Kitraki, E. Corticosterone-regulated actions in the rat brain are affected by perinatal exposure to low dose of bisphenol A. Neuroscience 2010, 167, 741–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Bielajew, C.; Konkle, A.T.; Kentner, A.C.; Baker, S.L.; Stewart, A.; Hutchins, A.A.; Santa-Maria Barbagallo, L.; Fouriezos, G. Strain and gender specific effects in the forced swim test: Effects of previous stress exposure. Stress 2003, 6, 269–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Baker, S.L.; Kentner, A.C.; Konkle, A.T.; Santa-Maria Barbagallo, L.; Bielajew, C. Behavioral and physiological effects of chronic mild stress in female rats. Physiol. Behav. 2006, 87, 314–322. [Google Scholar]
  148. Harley, K.G.; Gunier, R.B.; Kogut, K.; Johnson, C.; Bradman, A.; Calafat, A.M.; Eskenazi, B. Prenatal and early childhood bisphenol A concentrations and behavior in school-aged children. Environ. Res. 2013, 126, 43–50. [Google Scholar]
  149. Perera, F.; Vishnevetsky, J.; Herbstman, J.B.; Calafat, A.M.; Xiong, W.; Rauh, V.; Wang, S. Prenatal bisphenol A exposure and child behavior in an inner-city cohort. Environ. Health Perspect. 2012, 120, 1190–1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Braun, J.M.; Kalkbrenner, A.E.; Calafat, A.M.; Yolton, K.; Ye, X.; Dietrich, K.N.; Lanphear, B.P. Impact of early-life bisphenol A exposure on behavior and executive function in children. Pediatrics 2011, 128, 873–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Braun, J.M.; Yolton, K.; Dietrich, K.N.; Hornung, R.; Ye, X.; Calafat, A.M.; Lanphear, B.P. Prenatal bisphenol A exposure and early childhood behavior. Environ. Health Perspect. 2009, 117, 1945–1952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Hong, S.B.; Hong, Y.C.; Kim, J.W.; Park, E.J.; Shin, M.S.; Kim, B.N.; Yoo, H.J.; Cho, I.H.; Bhang, S.Y.; Cho, S.C. Bisphenol A in relation to behavior and learning of school-age children. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiatry 2013, 54, 890–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Birnbaum, L.S.; Fenton, S.E. Cancer and developmental exposure to endocrine disruptors. Environ. Health Perspect. 2003, 111, 389–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Weinhouse, C.; Anderson, O.S.; Bergin, I.L.; Vandenbergh, D.J.; Gyekis, J.P.; Dingman, M.A.; Yang, J.; Dolinoy, D.C. Dose-dependent incidence of hepatic tumors in adult mice following perinatal exposure to bisphenol A. Environ. Health Perspect. 2014, 122, 485–491. [Google Scholar]
  155. Dong, Y.; Araki, M.; Hirane, M.; Tanabe, E.; Fukushima, N.; Tsujiuchi, T. Effects of bisphenol A and 4-nonylphenol on cellular responses through the different induction of LPA receptors in liver epithelial WB-F344 cells. J. Recept. Signal. Transduct. Res. 2014, 34, 201–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Lin, M.E.; Herr, D.R.; Chun, J. Lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) receptors: Signaling properties and disease relevance. Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat. 2010, 91, 130–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Okabe, K.; Hayashi, M.; Kato, K.; Okumura, M.; Fukui, R.; Honoki, K.; Fukushima, N.; Tsujiuchi, T. Lysophosphatidic acid receptor-3 increases tumorigenicity and aggressiveness of rat hepatoma RH7777 cells. Mol. Carcinog. 2013, 52, 247–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Yu, S.; Murph, M.M.; Lu, Y.; Liu, S.; Hall, H.S.; Liu, J.; Stephens, C.; Fang, X.; Mills, G.B. Lysophosphatidic acid receptors determine tumorigenicity and aggressiveness of ovarian cancer cells. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2008, 100, 1630–1642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Soto, A.M.; Brisken, C.; Schaeberle, C.; Sonnenschein, C. Does cancer start in the womb? Altered mammary gland development and predisposition to breast cancer due to in utero exposure to endocrine disruptors. J. Mammary Gland Biol. Neoplasi. 2013, 18, 199–208. [Google Scholar]
  160. Acevedo, N.; Davis, B.; Schaeberle, C.M.; Sonnenschein, C.; Soto, A.M. Perinatally administered bisphenol A as a potential mammary gland carcinogen in rats. Environ. Health Perspect. 2013, 121, 1040–1046. [Google Scholar]
  161. Vandenberg, L.N.; Schaeberle, C.M.; Rubin, B.S.; Sonnenschein, C.; Soto, A.M. The male mammary gland: A target for the xenoestrogen bisphenol A. Reprod. Toxicol. 2013, 37, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Fernandez, S.V.; Huang, Y.; Snider, K.E.; Zhou, Y.; Pogash, T.J.; Russo, J. Expression and DNA methylation changes in human breast epithelial cells after bisphenol A exposure. Int. J. Oncol. 2012, 41, 369–377. [Google Scholar]
  163. Prins, G.S.; Ye, S.H.; Birch, L.; Ho, S.M.; Kannan, K. Serum bisphenol A pharmacokinetics and prostate neoplastic responses following oral and subcutaneous exposures in neonatal Sprague-Dawley rats. Reprod. Toxicol. 2011, 31, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  164. Vandenberg, L.N. Exposure to bisphenol A in Canada: Invoking the precautionary principle. CMAJ 2011, 183, 1265–1270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. What is Bisphenol A. Available online: http://www.bisphenol-a.org/ (accessed on 14 July 2014).
  166. Michaels, D. Manufactured uncertainty: Protecting public health in the age of contested science and product defense. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2006, 1076, 149–162. [Google Scholar]
  167. Borrell, B. Toxicoloty: The Big Test for Bisphenol A. Available online: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100421/full/4641122a.html (accessed on 14 July 2014).
  168. Goodman, J.E.; McConnell, E.E.; Sipes, I.G.; Witorsch, R.J.; Slayton, T.M.; Yu, C.J.; Lewis, A.S.; Rhomberg, L.R. An updated weight of the evidence evaluation of reproductive and developmental effects of low doses of bisphenol A. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2006, 36, 387–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Goodman, J.E.; Witorsch, R.J.; McConnell, E.E.; Sipes, I.G.; Slayton, T.M.; Yu, C.J.; Franz, A.M.; Rhomberg, L.R. Weight-of-evidence evaluation of reproductive and developmental effects of low doses of bisphenol A. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2009, 39, 1–75. [Google Scholar]
  170. Lamb, J.C., 4th; Boffetta, P.; Foster, W.G.; Goodman, J.E.; Hentz, K.L.; Rhomberg, L.R.; Staveley, J.; Swaen, G.; van Der Kraak, G.; Williams, A.L. Critical comments on the WHO-UNEP State of the Science of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals—2012. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2014, 69, 22–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Nagel, S.C.; vom Saal, F.S.; Thayer, K.A.; Dhar, M.G.; Boechler, M.; Welshons, W.V. Relative binding affinity-serum modified access (RBA-SMA) assay predicts the relative in vivo bioactivity of the xenoestrogens bisphenol A and octylphenol. Environ. Health Perspect. 1997, 105, 70–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Vom Saal, F.S.; Timms, B.G.; Montano, M.M.; Palanza, P.; Thayer, K.A.; Nagel, S.C.; Dhar, M.D.; Ganjam, V.K.; Parmigiani, S.; Welshons, W.V. Prostate enlargement in mice due to fetal exposure to low doses of estradiol or diethylstilbestrol and opposite effects at high doses. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1997, 94, 2056–2061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Cagen, S.Z.; Waechter, J.M., Jr.; Dimond, S.S.; Breslin, W.J.; Butala, J.H.; Jekat, F.W.; Joiner, R.L.; Shiotsuka, R.N.; Veenstra, G.E.; Harris, L.R. Normal reproductive organ development in Wistar rats exposed to bisphenol A in the drinking water. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 1999, 30, 130–139. [Google Scholar]
  174. Cagen, S.Z.; Waechter, J.M., Jr.; Dimond, S.S.; Breslin, W.J.; Butala, J.H.; Jekat, F.W.; Joiner, R.L.; Shiotsuka, R.N.; Veenstra, G.E.; Harris, L.R. Normal reproductive organ development in CF-1 mice following prenatal exposure to bisphenol A. Toxicol. Sci. 1999, 50, 36–44. [Google Scholar]
  175. Ashby, J.; Tinwell, H.; Haseman, J. Lack of effects for low dose levels of bisphenol A and diethylstilbestrol on the prostate gland of CF1 mice exposed in utero. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 1999, 30, 156–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Ashby, J. Problems associated with the recognition and confirmation of low-dose endocrine toxicities. Nonlinearity Biol. Toxicol. Med. 2003, 1, 439–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. NIEHS-supported Bisphenol A Research Articles. Available online: http://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bpa-related/index.cfm (accessed on 14 July 2014).

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mileva, G.; Baker, S.L.; Konkle, A.T.M.; Bielajew, C. Bisphenol-A: Epigenetic Reprogramming and Effects on Reproduction and Behavior. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014, 11, 7537-7561. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110707537

AMA Style

Mileva G, Baker SL, Konkle ATM, Bielajew C. Bisphenol-A: Epigenetic Reprogramming and Effects on Reproduction and Behavior. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2014; 11(7):7537-7561. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110707537

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mileva, Guergana, Stephanie L. Baker, Anne T.M. Konkle, and Catherine Bielajew. 2014. "Bisphenol-A: Epigenetic Reprogramming and Effects on Reproduction and Behavior" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 11, no. 7: 7537-7561. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110707537

APA Style

Mileva, G., Baker, S. L., Konkle, A. T. M., & Bielajew, C. (2014). Bisphenol-A: Epigenetic Reprogramming and Effects on Reproduction and Behavior. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 11(7), 7537-7561. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110707537

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop