1996
DOI: 10.1897/1551-5028(1996)015<1524:abkmef>2.3.co;2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Bleached-Kraft Mill Effluent Fraction Causing Induction of a Fish Mixed-Function Oxygenase Enzyme

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
26
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2002
2002

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Analyzing EROD induction of environmental mixtures is often based on the absolute induction at a distinct dilution [15–17]. Our results show that dose‐response plots for EROD induction of the acetonic sediment extract and its primary and secondary fractions are peak‐ or bell‐shaped plots (Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Analyzing EROD induction of environmental mixtures is often based on the absolute induction at a distinct dilution [15–17]. Our results show that dose‐response plots for EROD induction of the acetonic sediment extract and its primary and secondary fractions are peak‐ or bell‐shaped plots (Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Bioassay‐directed chemical fractionation procedures, which combine physicochemical fractionation steps with biotesting and chemical analysis [13,14], are an appropriate application of microbiotests, particularly when they indicate specific modes of toxic action and/or the presence of specific chemical classes. In vitro EROD assays in combination with physico‐chemical fractionation and chemical analysis have been applied to identify EROD‐inducing compounds in environmental samples such as pulp mill effluents [15,16] and extracts of settling particulate matter [17]. A problem in the application of in vitro EROD assays for testing environmental samples, however, is the lack of a generally accepted approach to quantify EROD induction of complex environmental samples.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Continuous exposure, as used in standard tests, may therefore not provide a true estimate of the ecotoxicity of compounds and could result in both over‐ and under‐estimations of ecotoxicity 11. 12 Possible reasons for this include: (1) organisms are able to detoxify or depurate any accumulated test compound during the exposure interval;13, 14 (2) induced individual tolerance—the first pulse may strengthen survivors through acclimation or induction of detoxification enzymes;15, 16 (3) individual selection—weaker individuals may be removed by the first pulse, resulting in selection of more robust individuals and an apparent reduction in responses to future exposure; and (4) ecological recovery—after exposure, an impacted population may or may not recover, depending on the characteristics of the species that are affected.…”
Section: Realistic Exposure Scenariosmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These data suggest that labile compounds are present that may mimic the induction of persistent dioxinlike compounds. Burnison et al [11] used bioassay‐driven fractionation techniques to confirm that inducers in secondary‐treated BKME included multi‐ring polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) with alkyl substitutions instead of chlorine substitution. This raises the possibility that prolonged exposure to labile compounds may sustain MFO induction, as does dioxin exposure.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%