Mutagenicity of antibiotics in microbial assays

Mitchell, I.deG.; Dixon, Patrick A. F.; Gilbert, P.; White, Debra

doi:10.1016/0165-1218(80)90077-4

Cited by 22 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Epigenetic changes may occur leading to problems with determinations of DNA base sequences to phenotypic changes of the fungus (see Paterson and Lima 2009) in culture media during isolations. These compounds are known to be mutagenic (Martelli et al 1991;Mitchell et al 1980;Oliveria et al 2011). …”

Section: Sources Of Mutagensmentioning

confidence: 96%

Biochemical mutagens affect the preservation of fungi and biodiversity estimations

Paterson

Lima

2012

Appl Microbiol Biotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many fungi have significant industrial applications or biosafety concerns and maintaining the original characteristics is essential. The preserved fungi have to represent the situation in nature for posterity, biodiversity estimations, and taxonomic research. However, spontaneous fungal mutations and secondary metabolites affecting producing fungi are well known. There is increasing interest in the preservation of microbes in Biological Resource Centers (BRC) to ensure that the organisms remain viable and stable genetically. It would be anathema if they contacted mutagens routinely. However, for the purpose of this discussion, there are three potential sources of biochemical mutagens when obtaining individual fungi from the environment: (a) mixtures of microorganisms are plated routinely onto growth media containing mutagenic antibiotics to control overgrowth by contaminants, (b) the microbial mixtures may contain microorganisms capable of producing mutagenic secondary metabolites, and (c) target fungi for isolation may produce "self" mutagens in pure culture. The probability that these compounds could interact with fungi undermines confidence in the preservation process and the potential effects of these biochemical mutagens are considered for the first time on strains held in BRC in this review.

show abstract

Section: Sources Of Mutagensmentioning

confidence: 96%

Biochemical mutagens affect the preservation of fungi and biodiversity estimations

Paterson

Lima

2012

Appl Microbiol Biotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The mutagenic load is made higher when antibiotics in the media are considered, which are at high concentrations to ensure antibiosis: chloramphenicol, gentamicin and cycloheximide are employed and are known mutagens [24][25][26] and mutagenic Rose Bengal is used frequently [27]. The target fungi will be at low concentrations, tending to increase mutagenic pressure, as the effect is dependent on the amount of organism (i.e.…”

Section: Isolation and Growthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mutagens affect food and water biodeteriorating fungi

Paterson

Lima

2015

Current Opinion in Food Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many areas of food mycology could be affected detrimentally by mutation of wild type fungi. Some of these will contact mutagens from pre-isolation to experimentation and the effect on fungi isolated from mycotoxin-contaminated food is assessed for the first time in this review. However, this mutagen issue is not considered by other authors in primary research papers, which is relevant to molecular biology techniques for gene sequencing, phylogenetics, diagnostics and mycotoxin production. The presence of mutagens is anathema to methods for DNA analysis at the experimental design level and concepts such as cryptic species and correlating anamorphs with teleomorphs are affected. Strains held in culture collections may be artifacts. Methods to ameliorate the problem are provided herein.

show abstract

“…However, some controversial outcomes suggesting the possibility of DNA damage induced by chloramphenicol in E. coli and in S. Typhimurium have been published by McCann et al (1976), Jackson et al (1977), Mitchell et al (1980) and Suter and Jaeger (1982). McCann et al (1976) and Jackson et al (1977) found that the toxicity of chloramphenicol interfered with attempts to examine the mutagenicity of this drug in S. Typhimurium.…”

Section: Genotoxicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both isomers also induced DNA strand breaks in bacteria, however the Dthreo-isomer was much less effective. Mitchell et al (1980) reported that chloramphenicol induced forward mutation to L-azetidine-2-carboxylic acid resistance in E. coli WP2 and was weakly active in reversion of frameshift mutation in S. Typhimurium TA98, but these responses were closely correlated with the toxic effects. Suter and Jaeger (1982) tested chloramphenicol in different DNA-repair deficient bacterial strains and reported chloramphenicol to be inactive in B. subtilis (strains H17/M45 and HLL3g/HJ-15) and active at variable extents in different strains of E. coli (AB1157/JC5547, AB1157/JC2921, AB1157/JC2926 and AB1157/JC5519).…”

Section: Genotoxicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the genotoxicity test system with lower eukaryotes, chloramphenicol did not show any activity in inducing sex-linked lethal mutations in Drosophila melanogaster (Clark, 1963;Nasrat et al, 1977). Chloramphenicol was not mutagenic in Saccharomyces cerevisiae diploid strains with and without metabolic activation (Carnevali et al, 1971;Mitchell et al, 1980) but positive in a specific cold-sensitive Saccharomyces cerevisiae haploid strain 1121, highly mutable into a cytoplasmic petite mutation that can also be induced by growth at the non-permissive temperature of 18 °C (Weislogel and Butow, 1970;Williamson et al, 1971). …”

Section: Genotoxicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Scientific Opinion on Chloramphenicol in food and feed

2014

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chloramphenicol is an antibiotic not authorised for use in food-producing animals in the European Union (EU). However, being produced by soil bacteria, it may occur in plants. The European Commission asked EFSA for a scientific opinion on the risks to human and animal health related to the presence of chloramphenicol in food and feed and whether a reference point for action (RPA) of 0.3 µg/kg is adequate to protect public and animal health. Data on occurrence of chloramphenicol in food extracted from the national residue monitoring plan results and from the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) were too limited to carry out a reliable human dietary exposure assessment. Instead, human dietary exposure was calculated for a scenario in which chloramphenicol is present at 0.3 µg/kg in all foods of animal origin, foods containing enzyme preparations and foods which may be contaminated naturally. The mean chronic dietary exposure for this worst-case scenario would range from 11 to 17 and 2.2 to 4.0 ng/kg b.w. per day for toddlers and adults, respectively. The potential dietary exposure of livestock to chloramphenicol was estimated to be below 1 µg/kg b.w. per day. Chloramphenicol is implicated in the generation of aplastic anaemia in humans and causes reproductive/hepatotoxic effects in animals. Margins of exposure for these effects were calculated at 2.4 × 10 5 or greater and the CONTAM Panel concluded that it is unlikely that exposure to food contaminated with chloramphenicol at or below 0.3 µg/kg is a health concern for aplastic anaemia or reproductive/hepatotoxic effects. Chloramphenicol exhibits genotoxicity but, owing to the lack of data, the risk of carcinogenicity cannot be assessed. The SUMMARYChloramphenicol is a broad-spectrum antibiotic effective against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and, in the past, has been widely used to treat infections in both humans and animals. Chloramphenicol is not authorised for use in food-producing animals in the European Union (EU) but may be used in human medicine and in treatments for non-food-producing animals. Apart from its potential occurrence as a residue in food from illicit treatment of food-producing animals, chloramphenicol has also been used in feed and food enzyme products and may occur naturally in plants from its production by the soil bacterium Streptomyces venezuelae.The EFSA Scientific Opinion entitled "Guidance on methodological principles and scientific methods to be taken into account when establishing Reference Points for Action (RPAs) for non-allowed pharmacologically active substances present in food of animal origin" identified an approach for establishing RPAs for various categories of non-allowed pharmacologically active substances. However, the opinion also identified certain categories of non-allowed pharmacologically active substances that are considered to be outside the scope of the procedure, including substances causing blood dyscrasias (aplastic anaemia) such as chloramphenicol. As chloramphenicol is excluded fro...

show abstract

Mutagenicity of antibiotics in microbial assays

Cited by 22 publications

References 13 publications

Biochemical mutagens affect the preservation of fungi and biodiversity estimations

Biochemical mutagens affect the preservation of fungi and biodiversity estimations

Mutagens affect food and water biodeteriorating fungi

Scientific Opinion on Chloramphenicol in food and feed

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About