Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

Boon, J.P. et al.

Boon, Sleiderink, Helle, Dekker, van Schanke, Roex, Hillebrand, Klamer, Govers, Pastor, Morse, Wester, de Boer,

The use of microsomal in vitro assay to study phase I biotransformation of chlorobornanes (Toxaphene) in marine mammals and birds. Possible consequences of biotransformation for bioaccumulation and genotoxicity.

The factors determining the bioaccumulation of lipophilic compounds in wildlife are often poorly understood, partly because it is difficult to do in vivo experiments with animals such as marine mammals and birds. To evaluate the role of phase I biotransformation in the bioaccumulation process of chlorobornanes (toxaphene), this was studied in in vitro assays with hepatic microsomes of animals that could be sampled shortly after death. The capacity of microsomes to metabolise a technical toxaphene mixture decreased in the order Phoca vitulina (harbour seal) >> Lagenorhynchus albirostris (whitebeaked dolphin) approximately equal to Diomedea immutabilis (Laysan albatross) > Physeter macrocephalus (sperm whale). Harbour seal microsomes metabolised the chlorobornane (CHB) congeners CHB-32 and CHB-62; whitebeaked dolphin and Laysan albatross microsomes only metabolised CHB-32. Metabolism of CHB-26 and CHB-50 was never observed. The negative chemical ionisation (NCI-) mass spectra of some of the hydroxylated metabolites were obtained. The number of peaks in the toxaphene residues of wildlife extracts decreased in the order of increasing in-vitro biotransformation capacity. Thus, the results of the in vitro assays and residue analysis were in accordance, although assays with microsomes of more individuals of the same species are required for a more general conclusion at the species level. Finally, the effect of in vitro biotransformation was evaluated in terms of the genotoxic potential using the Mutatox assay. Only technical toxaphene and CHB-32 were genotoxic in the direct assay, whereas the addition of rat S9 fraction or microsomes of harbour seal and albatross decreased the genotoxic response. Thus, organisms with a low ability to metabolise chlorobornanes, such as whales, may be most affected by the carcinogenic properties of toxaphene. A hypothetical reaction which fits the experimental results is discussed. Based on these results it is concluded that in vitro assays with microsomes of wildlife animals which died a natural cause can act as a valuable tool to assess the occurrence and effects of phase I metabolism. Some precautions are discussed, that should be taken to reduce the chance of false negative results.[1]

References

The use of microsomal in vitro assay to study phase I biotransformation of chlorobornanes (Toxaphene) in marine mammals and birds. Possible consequences of biotransformation for bioaccumulation and genotoxicity. Boon, J.P., Sleiderink, H.M., Helle, M.S., Dekker, M., van Schanke, A., Roex, E., Hillebrand, M.T., Klamer, H.J., Govers, B., Pastor, D., Morse, D., Wester, P.G., de Boer, J. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. C, Pharmacol. Toxicol. Endocrinol. (1998) [Pubmed]

Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.