2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.05.024
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The organophosphate insecticide chlorpyrifos confers its genotoxic effects by inducing DNA damage and cell apoptosis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
44
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 102 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
4
44
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The binding of chlorpyrifos with DNA to produce DNA adducts leads to an increasing concern about the genotoxic risk of chlorpyrifos in fish. Li et al (2015) observed that the sublethal concentrations of chlorpyrifos induced significant concentration-dependent single strand DNA breaks in the treated cells as compared to control group and conclude that chlorpyrifos is a strongly genotoxic agent that can induce DNA damage and cell apoptosis. DNA strand breaks have been mainly ascribed to the excessive accumulation of reactive oxygen species therefore, it was possible that DNA adducts, and reactive oxygen species contribute to the bifenthrin + chlorpyrifos mediated DNA damage.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The binding of chlorpyrifos with DNA to produce DNA adducts leads to an increasing concern about the genotoxic risk of chlorpyrifos in fish. Li et al (2015) observed that the sublethal concentrations of chlorpyrifos induced significant concentration-dependent single strand DNA breaks in the treated cells as compared to control group and conclude that chlorpyrifos is a strongly genotoxic agent that can induce DNA damage and cell apoptosis. DNA strand breaks have been mainly ascribed to the excessive accumulation of reactive oxygen species therefore, it was possible that DNA adducts, and reactive oxygen species contribute to the bifenthrin + chlorpyrifos mediated DNA damage.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The use of a plant, i.e. an organism with relatively high level of complexity, provides data about potential damage to DNA in a multicellular context, a possibility that is not provided by cell cultures, even if the results may be of importance since the genomes of cultured cells may be of mammals, as in the case of mouse bone marrow cells (Nabeel et al 2008;Algarni 2018) or even transformed lines of human cells (Li et al 2015). Compared to the use of animals for testing, the AT is more cost effective (Vicentini et al 2001;Teixeira et al 2003;Tedesco and Laughinhouse, 2012) and potentially provides a large amount of data with very easy cultivation techniques and without the ethical concerns that affect the use of animals in testing and that necessitate complex breeding guidelines.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mutagenesis may cause damages in the offspring and, at other times, be a part of the process that results in carcinogenicity (Zhang & Vijg, 2018). Li et al (2015) demonstrated that CPF could induce breaks in the DNA structure in cultured human lymphocytes in a concentration-dependent manner (35, 70, 105, and 175 μg mL -1 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%