| Literature DB >> 29051440 |
Susana Viegas1,2, Liliana Aranha Caetano3,4, Merja Korkalainen5, Tiago Faria6, Cátia Pacífico7, Elisabete Carolino8, Anita Quintal Gomes9,10, Carla Viegas11,12.
Abstract
Organic dust and related microbial exposures are the main inducers of several respiratory symptoms. Occupational exposure to organic dust is very common and has been reported in diverse settings. In vitro tests using relevant cell cultures can be very useful for characterizing the toxicity of complex mixtures present in the air of occupational environments such as organic dust. In this study, the cell viability and the inflammatory response, as measured by the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines tumor necrosis factor-α (TNFα) and interleukin-1 β (IL-1β), were determined in human macrophages derived from THP-1 monocytic cells. These cells were exposed to air samples from five occupational settings known to possess high levels of contamination of organic dust: poultry and swine feed industries, waste sorting, poultry production and slaughterhouses. Additionally, fungi and particle contamination of those settings was studied to better characterize the organic dust composition. All air samples collected from the assessed workplaces caused both cytotoxic and pro-inflammatory effects. The highest responses were observed in the feed industry, particularly in swine feed production. This study emphasizes the importance of measuring the organic dust/mixture effects in occupational settings and suggests that differences in the organic dust content may result in differences in health effects for exposed workers.Entities:
Keywords: cytotoxic effects; in vitro; inflammatory effects; occupational exposure; organic dust
Year: 2017 PMID: 29051440 PMCID: PMC5606674 DOI: 10.3390/toxics5010008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Toxics ISSN: 2305-6304
Sampling sites selected from each occupational environment. Each sampling site corresponds to the workplaces where the workers spend more time.
| Poultry Feed Industry (PFI) | Swine Feed Industry (SFI) | Waste Sorting Plant (WSP) | Poultry Pavilion (PP) | Slaughterhouse (S) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Premixing | Reception room | Alveoli (waste discharging area) | Pavilion | Swine bleeding |
| Bagging line 2-1 | Bagging line | Waste without sorting cabinet | - | Meat cutting |
| Bagging line 2-2 | Final product warehouse | Waste with sorting cabinet | - | Swine gutting |
| Manual mixing | Pharmacy | - | - | - |
| Granulator | Control room | - | - | - |
| Control lab | - | - | - | - |
Sequence of primers and TaqMan probes used for real time PCR.
| Sequence | |
|---|---|
| Primer Forward | 5′-GTCCAAGCAACAGGCCAAGT-3′ |
| Primer Reverse | 5′-TCGTGCATGTTGGTGATGGT-3′ |
| Probe | 5′-TGTCTTGATCGGCGCCCG-3′ |
| Primer Forward | 5′-CGCGTCCGGTCCTCG-3′ |
| Primer Reverse | 5′-TTAGAAAAATAAAGTTGGGTGTCGG-3′ |
| Probe | 5′-TGTCACCTGCTCTGTAGGCCCG-3′ |
| Primer Forward | 5′-CGGGTCTAATGCAGCTCCAA-3′ |
| Primer Reverse | 5′-CGGGCACCAATCCTTTCA-3′ |
| Probe | 5′-CGTCAATAAGCGCTTTT-3′ |
Number of samples collected and assessments performed.
| Occupational Environments | Conventional Methods | Molecular Biology | Particulate Matter | In Vitro Toxicological Assessment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Impinger Method | Filter Method | ||||
| 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | |
| 6 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 6 | |
| 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | Not assessed | 1 | |
| 3 | 3 | 3 | Not assessed | 3 | |
| 18 | 15 | 15 | 11 | 18 | |
Figure 1Fungal load distribution in the five occupational environments with both sampling methods applied (Filter and Impinger Coriolis), respectively. Dashed line represents reference limits suggested by World Health Organization (WHO). Countless colonies were counted as 500 colony-forming units (CFU).
Particle concentrations measured in three different occupational settings, with mass average (mg/m3) for each workplace, mass average, minimum, maximum, and standard deviation for each setting, and Kruskal–Wallis test results. SD: standard deviation.
| Settings | Workplace | Mass Average (mg/m3) | mg/m3 | Kruskal–Wallis Test Results | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Rank | df | |||||||
| Poultry feed industry (PFI) | Bagging line (5 kg) | 0.181 | Mass average | 90 | 141,02 | 35,342 | 2 | 2.1 × 10−8 |
| Premixing control room | 0.074 | |||||||
| Control lab | 0.038 | |||||||
| Swine feed industry (SFI) | Reception room | 0.113 | Mass average | 150 | 149,81 | |||
| Bagging line | 0.053 | |||||||
| Warehouse final product | 0.080 | |||||||
| Pharmacy | 0.014 | |||||||
| Control room | 0.010 | |||||||
| Waste sorting plant (WSP) | Alveoli | 0.049 | Mass average | 90 | 216,13 | |||
| Pre Screening | 0.044 | |||||||
| Screening | 0.053 | |||||||
Figure 2Cell viability of macrophages derived from THP-1 cells after treatment with air samples collected from the five occupational settings as calculated by % of medium control. Columns represent mean values ± standard error SE (n = 4) in two independent experiments using dilutions 1:20 and 1:50. Dilution 1:50 is missing from the WSP and PP settings, since 1:20 dilution was not highly cytotoxic to cells in the first experiment. Statistical significant differences (p < 0.05) between samples and medium control are marked with asterisks (*). PBS: phosphate-buffered saline.
Figure 3Relative cell viability of THP-1 cell line. Columns represent mean values ± SEM (n = 4) for dilution 1:20 of air samples from five occupational settings. Statistical differences between the five occupational settings and control groups (medium and PBS) are reported as *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05. Cell viability (% of control) = (A) test/(A) control × 100.
Figure 4IL-1β (A) and TNFα (B) responses after treatment of macrophages derived from THP-1 monocytic cells with samples collected from the different occupational settings using dilution 1:20. The controls contained medium or PBS in the place of samples. Columns represent mean ± SE of two replicates from one representative experiment out of two independent experiments.