2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2013.07.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Investigation of spin-trapping artifacts formed by the Forrester-Hepburn mechanism

Abstract: Free radical detection with ESR spin trapping relies on the specific addition of the radical to nitrone/nitroso compounds. It has been proposed that spin traps can react also in biological systems to give false-positive results. For nitrone spin traps, the reaction with nucleophiles, first described by Forrester and Hepburn, has been discussed as the most critical source of artifacts. For artifact identification, the ESR preincubation method may be used, which employs isotopically marked spin traps. Here we in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, the intensity of DMPO–OH signal did not weaken at all in the presence of excessive TBA as the scavenger for • OH (Figure b), while that in the Fenton process was remarkably suppressed under comparable conditions but with much lower concentration of TBA (Figure S17). These results collectively suggested that the observed DMPO–OH signal should not be arbitrarily attributed to • OH but to an artifact spin trap that has been widely recognized. , …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…Moreover, the intensity of DMPO–OH signal did not weaken at all in the presence of excessive TBA as the scavenger for • OH (Figure b), while that in the Fenton process was remarkably suppressed under comparable conditions but with much lower concentration of TBA (Figure S17). These results collectively suggested that the observed DMPO–OH signal should not be arbitrarily attributed to • OH but to an artifact spin trap that has been widely recognized. , …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…5.2 ). Since its first application to biological systems in 1979, important contributions have been made to improve spin trap structures based on mechanistic analysis of the spin trapping reaction and of the spin adduct decomposition pathways [362] , [363] , but also to improve the methodology by characterizing its limitations, artefacts, and sources of misinterpretations [364] , [365] , [366] , [367] , [368] . Intracellular detection and quantification are not straightforward, and in vivo detection of O 2 •- is impossible with spin traps coupled to EPR.…”
Section: Optimizing Ros Detection Using Epr or Fluorescence: In Vivo mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is essential that spin trap solutions are free of contamination by hydroxylamine and nitroxide impurities that can impair O2 •-detection and give artifacts. Contaminating hydroxylamines can be tested by treatment with ferricyanide which converts them to EPR-visible nitroxides [62]. Most commercially available DMPO contains paramagnetic impurities.…”
Section: Spin Trap Stock Solutionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Timmins et al proposed a technique involving pre-incubation with isotopically labeled spin traps to identify such artifacts [106]. This was further refined by Leinisch et al [62,107] and completed by auxiliary experiments by Ranguelova et al [98].…”
Section: False Positivesmentioning
confidence: 99%