<i>Photobacterium phosphoreum</i> toxicity bioassay. I. Test procedures and applications

Ribo, Juan M.; Kaiser, Klaus L.E.

doi:10.1002/tox.2540020307

Cited by 166 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Novel applications for bacterial luxAB as reporter genes are still being developed, including the use of recombinant E. coli cells containing the stress promoter recA fused to luxCDABE as a biosensor for ionizing radiation (40). In addition, it is possible to use a biosensor to assess changes in effluent toxicity (8,45) rather than monitoring exact toxin concentrations through measurement of bioluminescence quenching. Although new applications for bacterial whole-cell biosensors are expanding, there is growing recognition of their limitations, thereby stimulating the search for new biomarker systems (30).…”

Section: Applications Of Bioluminescence For Environmental Microbiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been reported that factors relating to cell density can have an effect on bioluminescence (61); we now know this to be the effects of autoinduction. Therefore, it is recommended that fresh bacterial suspensions are used and that cell density is controlled (45).…”

Section: The Microtox Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the advantages is its good statistical significance since the observed response is produced by a large number of cells (1 0 6 ). Also, this bioassay is amenable to automated toxicity data collection that can be used in mathematical models, such as Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships (45). Because of its rapid response and excellent sensitivity, the Microtox system is currently being used for toxicity assays in complex environmental media.…”

Section: The Microtox Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bioluminescent bacteria: lux genes as environmental biosensors

Nunes-Halldorson¹,

Duran²

2003

Braz. J. Microbiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioluminescent bacteria are widespread in natural environments. Over the years, many researchers have been studying the physiology, biochemistry and genetic control of bacterial bioluminescence. These discoveries have revolutionized the area of Environmental Microbiology through the use of luminescent genes as biosensors for environmental studies. This paper will review the chronology of scientific discoveries on bacterial bioluminescence and the current applications of bioluminescence in environmental studies, with special emphasis on the Microtox toxicity bioassay. Also, the general ecological significance of bioluminescence will be addressed.

show abstract

Section: Applications Of Bioluminescence For Environmental Microbiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Microtox Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Microtox Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bioluminescent bacteria: lux genes as environmental biosensors

Nunes-Halldorson¹,

Duran²

2003

Braz. J. Microbiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The assay, based on the luminescent bacterium V. fischeri NRRL B-1117, is in principle similar to the better known Microtox ® test [13][14][15]. The effect of test compounds on the luminiscent bacterium V. fischeri was evaluated at 5, 15 and 30 min of exposition determining the EC 50 .…”

Section: Bacterial Bioluminescence Assaymentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative evaluation of the effects of pesticides in acute toxicity luminescence bioassays

Fernández‐Alba

Hernando

López

et al. 2002

Analytica Chimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acute toxicity of pesticides in water was assessed singly and in mixtures using the responses of the luminescent bacterium Vibrio fischeri (BioTox TM ), the aquatic invertebrate Daphnia magna (Daphtoxkit TM ), and the MitoScan TM assay. The latter utilized fragmented mitochondria to enzymatically convert ␤-nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NADH) to its oxidized form, NAD + . The rate of the conversion being sensitive to type and concentration of toxicants. The pesticides tested were Carbofuran (2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethylbenzofuran-7-yl methylcarbamate), Cyromazine (N-cyclopropyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-triamine), Fenamiphos (ethyl 4-methylthio-m-tolyl isopropylphosphoramidate), and Formetanate (3-dimethylaminomethyleneiminophenyl methylcarbamate). The toxicity bioassays were characterized in terms of relative sensitivity, reproducibility, range of the linear response, and the ability to reveal synergistic/antagonistic interactions among toxicants. The D. magna assay was the most sensitive and best able to detect toxic interactions of mixtures. Also, unlike the other assays used, the response of the daphnid system was linear over a 10-fold change in pesticide concentration. Relative to the BioTox TM , the MitoScan TM was 2-to 11-fold more sensitive for the compounds and mixtures tested. The EC 50 reproducibility of all tests was within ±20% coefficient of variation; however, the lowest observable effect concentration (LOEC) were only reproducible to ±35% on average. Cyromazine was the least toxic of the pesticides tested. To test the predictive value of the concept of concentration addition, toxicities of binary and quaternary mixtures of four different pesticides were analyzed. Synergistic/antagonistic responses were most frequently observed in testing with D. magna. Synergistic/antagonistic effects were seen only in 25 and 50% of the cases with the BioTox TM and the MitoScan TM assays, respectively.

show abstract

“…The MicrotoxR bioassay system (Ribo and Kaiser, 1987) was used to test toxic responses to 49 water samples collected in 1991 and 28 samples collected in 1992 from the Sun River study area. The MicrotoxR bioassay system utilizes a photoluminescent bacterium, Photobacteriwn phosphoreum.…”

Section: Photoluminescent Bacteriamentioning

confidence: 99%