1995
DOI: 10.1016/0045-6535(94)00441-v
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

32P-postlabeling analysis of aromatic DNA-adducts in liver and brain of wild brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
2
0

Year Published

1999
1999
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
2
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar results were found in wild brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) from lakes with anthropogenic contaminants input on which biomarkers had higher levels in liver than in brain (Ray et al, 1995). This overall vision at the literature reinforce the idea that brain biomarkers require long-term exposure to an exogenous substance to activate, meanwhile liver recovers more effectively and rapidly after exposure, being stronger facing oxidative stress (Atli and Canli, 2007;Ray et al, 1995) possibly due to that on average, protein turnover rates in liver are shorter than those in brain (Rahman et al, 2016). In addition, it has to be considered that activities of CAT, SOD, and GPx in the liver of zebrafish did not show significant differences after MP exposure for 7 days (Chen et al, 2020), suggesting that liver also requires a minimum term of exposure to trigger the antioxidant system.…”
Section: Physiological Assessmentsupporting
confidence: 77%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Similar results were found in wild brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) from lakes with anthropogenic contaminants input on which biomarkers had higher levels in liver than in brain (Ray et al, 1995). This overall vision at the literature reinforce the idea that brain biomarkers require long-term exposure to an exogenous substance to activate, meanwhile liver recovers more effectively and rapidly after exposure, being stronger facing oxidative stress (Atli and Canli, 2007;Ray et al, 1995) possibly due to that on average, protein turnover rates in liver are shorter than those in brain (Rahman et al, 2016). In addition, it has to be considered that activities of CAT, SOD, and GPx in the liver of zebrafish did not show significant differences after MP exposure for 7 days (Chen et al, 2020), suggesting that liver also requires a minimum term of exposure to trigger the antioxidant system.…”
Section: Physiological Assessmentsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…Other studies carried out with Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) have already demonstrated different enzymatic responses to metal exposures depending on the concentration of the contaminant and the tissue analyzed (Atli et al, 2006;Atli and Canli, 2007). Similar results were found in wild brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) from lakes with anthropogenic contaminants input on which biomarkers had higher levels in liver than in brain (Ray et al, 1995). This overall vision at the literature reinforce the idea that brain biomarkers require long-term exposure to an exogenous substance to activate, meanwhile liver recovers more effectively and rapidly after exposure, being stronger facing oxidative stress (Atli and Canli, 2007;Ray et al, 1995) possibly due to that on average, protein turnover rates in liver are shorter than those in brain (Rahman et al, 2016).…”
Section: Physiological Assessmentsupporting
confidence: 66%
“…We used liver as the test organ because, compared to other organs, fish liver has relatively high CYP1A specific activity, which is important in DNA adduct formation (Ray et al, ; Levine and Oris, ). We used water as the route of exposure because exposure to BaP‐contaminated water is the primary route of uptake, as opposed to diet (Ray et al, ; Levine and Oris, ). Potter et al () revealed that 60 μg/L of homogeneously dispersed B a P in water induced DNA adduct formation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the liver has been proposed as the major site of CYP1A-catalyzed biotransformation in fish. [16][17][18] A previous study revealed that low levels (1.2 and 0.4 μg/L) of homogeneously dispersed BaP in water did not cause DNA adduct formation, while high levels (60 μg/L) of homogeneously dispersed BaP induced DNA adduct formation. 19) We selected 20 and 100 μg/L as the lower and upper concentrations, considering 60 μg/L as the median concentration.…”
Section: Bap Exposure and 32 P-postlabeling Assaymentioning
confidence: 99%