The YES is a low cost method used to detect estrogenic ligands in environmental samples, such as water, food, plant tissues, or personal care products. Data presented here compare 2 estrogen receptors (ERα and ERβ), 2 substrates (ONPG and CPRG), and 2 timelines (2 d protocol without refrigeration and seven-day protocol with refrigeration) for measuring estrogenicity in personal care products via the YES assay. The 7 d, refrigerated protocol using CPRG and yeast expressing ERα and/or ERβ best quantifies EEQs while also being compatible with the time constraints imposed by undergraduate laboratory courses that meet only once/week for several h. In fact, compared to the 2 d assay without refrigeration, the seven-day refrigerated assay was associated with reduced variance across plate replicates. In addition, the linear part of the standard curve was slightly expanded for data collected using the refrigerated assay. The linear portion of the standard curve defines the assay detection range and is the only portion of the standard curve that can be used to interpolate sample EEQs.
In all but one of the tested samples, EEQs measured using CPRG were lower than those quantified with ONPG. With a higher extinction coefficient and lower Km and Vmax, CPRG is ten times more sensitive than ONPG17. Thus, CPRG can be used at lower concentrations and can be used to detect lower amounts of β-galactosidase. For these reasons, CPRG is generally preferred over ONPG18,19. However, greater substrate sensitivity does not explain the lower EEQ values detected with CPRG. The higher EEQ values detected with ONPG could be due to matrix interference with the assay, as noted by other authors2,18. Yellow pigments from personal care product extracts could inflate EEQ values detected with ONPG. Others have circumvented this problem by including pigment controls in their experimental design2, an approach that doubles the number of plates in an experiment. When matrix interference may be problematic, CPRG may be a preferable substrate for the YES assay, although it is more expensive and requires longer incubation times than ONPG. Furthermore, the color change induced by the cleavage of substrate by β-galactosidase is more dramatic with CPRG, making it easier for students to visualize results.
Miller et al. (2010), who engineered the yeast used in this protocol, noted that yeast expressing ERβ were 30x more sensitive to 17β-estradiol than yeast expressing ERα, a finding substantiated by our data14. Apart from potential nuances in plasmid construction, Miller et al. (2010) could not explain this difference in sensitivity14. One difference between the two plasmid constructs is that ERα expression is regulated by galactose, whereas ERβ expression is regulated by either glucose or galactose. The yeast used in the YES assay are cultured in glucose media and only given galactose when they are diluted at the start of the assay. Therefore, yeast expressing ERβ might accumulate higher copy numbers of receptor proteins prior to the start of the assay, thereby conferring higher sensitivity to estrogenic ligands.
The lower sensitivity of ERα-expressing yeast may explain the higher rates of non-detection of estrogenicity in samples measured with ERα compared with ERβ. To increase the likelihood that sample EEQs will be detected, users could employ different extraction solvents and methods or add higher volumes of sample to the yeast. If higher sample volumes are used, the concentrations of E2 standards should be adjusted such that the same volume of standards and samples can be used in the assay. One limitation of adding more sample is that yeast can tolerate only 6 - 10% ethanol, with better tolerance at incubation temperatures of 30 Vs. 35 °C20. To control for effects of ethanol on yeast, investigators should add triplicate "yeast only" wells to the plate layout and confirm that the OD610 of these "yeast only" wells is comparable to the OD610 of vehicle control wells immediately after the addition of LacZ buffer. Alternatively, samples dissolved in ethanol can be added to dry microwell plates and the ethanol evaporated off before yeast are added. Dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) is also used as a sample solvent in YES assays, but the final working concentration of DMSO with yeast should be limited to 1%12.
The YES assay is a powerful screening tool for detecting estrogenicity in environmental samples. Specifically, the YES detects ligands that bind nuclear estrogen receptors that interact with estrogen response elements to direct gene expression14. However, the YES also has important limitations. The YES does not detect EEs that work through non-nuclear mechanisms such as membrane estrogen receptors or mechanisms that involve additional elements such as Activator Protein 1 (AP-1) transcription factors. Moreover, because yeast do not have the same metabolic capacity as mammalian cells, the YES cannot detect ligands that require metabolic activation to be estrogenic.
In addition, the YES assay cannot readily differentiate between estrogenic and anti-estrogenic ligands in complex samples. Instead, it measures net estrogenicity, which is the sum effect of estrogenic and anti-estrogenic ligands. To quantify the concentration of ER antagonists or evaluate the inhibitory activity of mixtures, the assay can be modified by incubating yeast with both the standard agonist (17β-estradiol) and a range of test sample concentrations12. This process determines if antagonists in the samples can diminish agonist-induced reporter activity and provides a useful screen for identifying the presence of ER antagonists in samples.
The protocol presented here can accommodate a variety of sample types, although some samples may require modifications to the extraction and sample preparation steps. For example, EEQs varied widely among replicates of some personal care products. The more variable samples tended to contain oil droplets or were otherwise not entirely homogeneous, indicating that a more lipophilic solvent such as diethyl ether would be helpful. Alternatively, oils and wax in personal care products could be excluded by extracting samples with 50% ethanol instead of 100% ethanol. A 50% ethanol extraction will also capture more water soluble estrogenic ligands (e.g., some pigments). However, 50% ethanol evaporates more slowly than 100% ethanol and thus may extend extraction time. Additionally, some samples (such as soaps) were cytotoxic to yeast, resulting in reduced cell density measurements (OD610). Fox et al. (2008) suggest that such samples should be diluted and retested if cell density differences exceed 30% compared to vehicle control wells12.
If the YES assay is used for analytical research purposes, dilution curves of sample pools can be tested to preemptively determine appropriate volumes of extract to be added to yeast in step 4.5. Alternatively, extracts can be simultaneously tested at multiple volumes (e.g., 5 µL and 20 µL extract added to yeast in step 4.5) or dilutions that span orders of magnitude (e.g., 0.2 µL, 2 µL, and 20 µL). "Appropriate" volumes of extract are those that identify estrogenicity by matching LacZ values along the linear part of the standard curve. Optimization prevents problems caused by adding too much or too little sample to the yeast, such as cytotoxicity, false negatives, or estrogenicity that exceeds the standard curve. As mentioned above, the volumes of samples and E2 standards should be adjusted when different amounts of ligand are used such that yeast are exposed to a consistent volume and concentration of ethanol or other vehicle across the plate.
Despite the potential for false negatives, the YES assay has been identified as a Tier 3 testing tool for endocrine disruptors by Schug et al. (2013), who developed a comprehensive Tiered Protocol for Endocrine Disruption (TiPED)21. For undergraduate education, the assay is valuable for teaching concepts related to endocrine disruption, cell culture, receptor binding, enzyme activity, genetic engineering, statistics, and experimental design. Students who use the assay also practice fundamental and broadly applicable laboratory skills such as serially diluting standards; extracting samples; making solutions; constructing and interpolating standard curves; calculating concentrations; making solutions; demonstrating sterile technique; culturing cells; identifying variables and controls; collecting, organizing, and analyzing data; constructing and interpreting graphs; and using common laboratory equipment such as micropipettors and spectrophotometers.