Literature DB >> 3141073

Aflatoxin B1 carcinogenesis and its relation to DNA adduct formation and adduct persistence in sensitive and resistant salmonid fish.

G S Bailey1, D E Williams, J S Wilcox, P M Loveland, R A Coulombe, J D Hendricks.   

Abstract

Rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) and coho salmon (oncorhynchus kisutch) were exposed to aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) either by passive embryo uptake or by dietary treatment after hatching and feeding onset. Trout exposed as embryos to an aqueous solution of 0.5 p.p.m. AFB1 for 15 min showed a 62% tumor incidence 12 months later, whereas coho salmon exposed to a similar solution for 30 min showed only a 9% incidence. The difference between salmon and trout response was even greater by dietary AFB1 treatment. Trout exposed for 4 weeks to 20 p.p.b. dietary AFB1 had a 62% tumor response 12 months later, whereas salmon exposed to 40 p.p.b. dietary AFB1 for 4 weeks failed to develop tumors. A 5% tumor incidence was observed in salmon 12 months after 3 weeks exposure to 5000 p.p.b. dietary AFB1, a lethal dose for trout. In addition to a lower tumor incidence when compared to trout, the neoplastic response of salmon to AFB1 is to produce benign hepatic adenomas in contrast to the malignant hepatocellular carcinomas seen in trout. AFB1 metabolism, DNA adduct formation, adduct persistence in vivo and in vitro and cytochrome P-450 isozyme composition were compared in livers of trout and salmon to understand the role of metabolism and initiation in this species difference. AFB1-DNA binding was 7-56 times greater in trout than salmon liver at various times after AFB1 injection, 20 times greater in embryos or in freshly isolated trout hepatocyte preparations after a 1 h incubation with aflatoxin B1, and 18 times greater in trout liver after a three week dietary (80 p.p.b.) exposure. The major AFB1-DNA adduct was 8,9-dihydro-8-(N7-guanyl)-9-hydroxyaflatoxin B1 in both species. Persistence of AFB1-DNA adducts in vivo in liver was high compared to mammalian systems, implying that active enzymatic removal of bulky DNA adducts is low in both species and probably not a factor in their differential response to aflatoxin. Species differences in other phase I and phase II metabolism pathways and in AFB1 elimination were, overall, much less striking than those previously observed for trout fed inhibitors of aflatoxin carcinogenesis. Rates of bile elimination of AFB1 detoxication products, and total excretion of aflatoxins into water after AFB1 exposure, were not significantly different between trout and salmon. Since detoxication differences were not observed, the species difference in AFB1-DNA binding appears to reflect less efficient cytochrome P-450 metabolism of aflatoxin to the reactive 8,9-epoxide in salmon, compared to trout.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3141073     DOI: 10.1093/carcin/9.11.1919

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Carcinogenesis        ISSN: 0143-3334            Impact factor:   4.944


  17 in total

1.  Orally administered erythromycin in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): residues in edible tissues and withdrawal time.

Authors:  Annarita Esposito; Laura Fabrizi; Dario Lucchetti; Luigi Marvasi; Ettore Coni; Emilio Guandalini
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2006-12-28       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 2.  Mode of action-based risk assessment of genotoxic carcinogens.

Authors:  Andrea Hartwig; Michael Arand; Bernd Epe; Sabine Guth; Gunnar Jahnke; Alfonso Lampen; Hans-Jörg Martus; Bernhard Monien; Ivonne M C M Rietjens; Simone Schmitz-Spanke; Gerlinde Schriever-Schwemmer; Pablo Steinberg; Gerhard Eisenbrand
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 5.153

Review 3.  Chemistry and structural biology of DNA damage and biological consequences.

Authors:  Michael P Stone; Hai Huang; Kyle L Brown; Ganesh Shanmugam
Journal:  Chem Biodivers       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.408

4.  The individual and combined effects of deoxynivalenol and aflatoxin B₁on primary hepatocytes of Cyprinus carpio.

Authors:  Cheng-Hua He; Yan-Hong Fan; Ying Wang; Chao-Ying Huang; Xi-Chun Wang; Hai-Bin Zhang
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 5.923

5.  In vitro cytochrome P450 monooxygenase and prostaglandin H-synthase mediated aflatoxin B1 biotransformation in guinea pig tissues: effects of beta-naphthoflavone treatment.

Authors:  L Liu; K Nakatsu; T E Massey
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 5.153

6.  Detoxification and antioxidant effects of garlic and curcumin in Oreochromis niloticus injected with aflatoxin B₁ with reference to gene expression of glutathione peroxidase (GPx) by RT-PCR.

Authors:  Manal I El-Barbary
Journal:  Fish Physiol Biochem       Date:  2015-11-21       Impact factor: 2.794

7.  Bypass of aflatoxin B1 adducts by the Sulfolobus solfataricus DNA polymerase IV.

Authors:  Surajit Banerjee; Kyle L Brown; Martin Egli; Michael P Stone
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2011-07-26       Impact factor: 15.419

Review 8.  Fish models for environmental carcinogenesis: the rainbow trout.

Authors:  G S Bailey; D E Williams; J D Hendricks
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  Structural perturbations induced by the alpha-anomer of the aflatoxin B(1) formamidopyrimidine adduct in duplex and single-strand DNA.

Authors:  Kyle L Brown; Markus W Voehler; Shane M Magee; Constance M Harris; Thomas M Harris; Michael P Stone
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2009-11-11       Impact factor: 15.419

10.  Does aflatoxin exposure in the United Kingdom constitute a cancer risk?

Authors:  J C Harrison; M Carvajal; R C Garner
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.