| Literature DB >> 23908554 |
Maxim Yu Sinitsky1, Vladimir G Druzhinin.
Abstract
Estimating the effects of small doses of ionising radiation on DNA is one of the most important problems in modern biology. Different cytogenetic methods exist to analyse DNA damage; the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN) for human peripheral blood lymphocytes is a simple, cheap and informative cytogenetic method that can be used to detect genotoxic-related markers. With respect to previous studies on radiation-induced genotoxicity, children are a poorly studied group, as evidenced by the few publications in this area. In this study, we assessed radon genotoxic effects by counting micronuclei (MN), nucleoplasmic bridges (NPBs) and nuclear buds (NBUDs) in the lymphocytes of children who are long-term residents from areas with high radon concentrations. In the exposed group, radon was found to cause significant cytogenetic alterations. We propose that this method can be employed for biomonitoring to screen for a variety of measures.Entities:
Keywords: children; cytochalasin B; genotoxicity; ionising radiation; micronuclei; micronucleus assay; radon
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23908554 PMCID: PMC3885124 DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rrt091
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Radiat Res ISSN: 0449-3060 Impact factor: 2.724
Radon concentration in the rooms of the boarding school (Tashtagol city, exposed group) and of the control settlement (Zarubino village)
| Settlement | Date of measurement | Number of measuring points | Average unit volume activity of radon, Bq/m3, M ± m | Limit variation, Bq/m3–Bq/m3, |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tashtagol | 11 Feb 2011 | 10 | 905 ± 134 | 650–1143 |
| Tashtagol | 2 Mar 2011 | 18 | 347 ± 49 | 74–749 |
| Zarubino | 25 Jan 2011 | 10 | 64 ± 13 | 39–203 |
| Zarubino | 6 Apr 2011 | 17 | 119 ± 27 | 53–172 |
Gender and age of children/teenagers included in the exposed group
| Person | Number | Age (M ± m) | Limit variation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 60 | 12.1 ± 0.31 | 8–17 |
| Male | 34 | 12.1 ± 0.45 | 8–16 |
| Female | 26 | 12.0 ± 0.48 | 8–17 |
Gender and age of children/teenagers included in the control group
| Person | Number | Age (M ± m) | Limit variation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 60 | 14.9 ± 0.32 | 8–18 |
| Male | 27 | 14.8 ± 0.42 | 9–17 |
| Female | 33 | 15.0 ± 0.47 | 8–18 |
The value of proliferation index (PI) and cell spectrum
| Total cells, % | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| mononucleated, M ± m | binucleated, M ± m | polynucleated, M ± m | ||
| Exposed group | 2.04* ± 0.002 | 26.0 ± 0.08 | 25.3* ± 0.08 | 40.8* ± 0.02 |
| Control group | 1.97 ± 0.002 | 27.7 ± 0.14 | 26.8 ± 0.08 | 38.0 ± 0.04 |
Significant difference between groups: *P < 0.01.
Characteristics of binucleated lymphocytes
| Total number of micronuclei | Cells with MN (%), M ± m | Cells with NPBs (%), M ± m | Cells with NBUDs (%), M ± m | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exposed group | 358* | 0.6* ± 0.005 | 0.39 ± 0.01 | 0.79 ± 0.02 |
| Control group | 202 | 0.3 ± 0.003 | 0.33 ± 0.01 | 1.23 ± 0.02 |
Significant difference between groups: *P < 0.001.
Fig. 1.Distribution of cells with MN (control group).
Fig. 2.Distribution of cells with MN (exposed group).
Fig. 3.Distribution of the total number of MN (control group).
Fig. 4.Distribution of the total number of MN (exposed group).