Literature DB >> 7934961

SOS induction in Escherichia coli and Salmonella mutagenicity: a comparison using 330 compounds.

V Mersch-Sundermann1, U Schneider, G Klopman, H S Rosenkranz.   

Abstract

To examine the concordance of two microbial genotoxicity short-term assays, 330 experimental results for the SOS chromotest using tester strain Escherichia coli PQ37 were compared with the results of the Salmonella/mammalian microsome mutagenicity assay with Salmonella typhimurium TA97, TA98, TA100, TA102, TA104, TA1535, TA1537 and/or TA1538. With respect to qualitative features, the concordance between SOS chromotest and Salmonella mutagenicity test results was 86.4% (sensitivity, 78.6%; specificity, 100%; chi 2 = 188.6). None of the non-mutagens (N = 120) were able to induce the SOS system. Additionally, 45 of the 210 S.typhimurium mutagens (21.5%) did not induce the SOS repair system. On closer examination, the majority of these 45 compounds (84%) were mutagens with activities between 0.001 and 10 rev/nmol. Even though the experimental protocols of both systems were not standardized, the correlation coefficient for the experimental results of the two test systems was 0.7 for the 330 chemicals. Except for aliphatic epoxides (r = 0.47), the mutagenicity/SOS induction correlations for congeneric data sets (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, nitroarenes, nitroarenofurans, mycotins) were even better (r = 0.72-0.95). Additionally, computer automated structure evaluation (CASE) analyses of the nature of the structural determinants associated with each endpoint indicate extensive homologies. The data can be taken to indicate that the two phenomena reflect common mechanisms of action.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7934961     DOI: 10.1093/mutage/9.3.205

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mutagenesis        ISSN: 0267-8357            Impact factor:   3.000


  6 in total

1.  Nitro musk compounds genotoxic activity : Genotoxicity testing of nitro musks with the SOS-chromotest and the sister-chromatid exchange test.

Authors:  S Kevekordes; K Grahl; A Zaulig; H Dunkelberg
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  A biosensor for environmental genotoxin screening based on an SOS lux assay in recombinant Escherichia coli cells.

Authors:  L R Ptitsyn; G Horneck; O Komova; S Kozubek; E A Krasavin; M Bonev; P Rettberg
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  Estimating the extent of the health hazard posed by high-production volume chemicals.

Authors:  A R Cunningham; H S Rosenkranz
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 9.031

4.  The In-Feed Antibiotic Carbadox Induces Phage Gene Transcription in the Swine Gut Microbiome.

Authors:  Timothy A Johnson; Torey Looft; Andrew J Severin; Darrell O Bayles; Daniel J Nasko; K Eric Wommack; Adina Howe; Heather K Allen
Journal:  mBio       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 7.867

5.  Zinc blocks SOS-induced antibiotic resistance via inhibition of RecA in Escherichia coli.

Authors:  Bryan E Bunnell; Jillian F Escobar; Kirsten L Bair; Mark D Sutton; John K Crane
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  The influence of organic solvents on estimates of genotoxicity and antigenotoxicity in the SOS chromotest.

Authors:  Nathalia Quintero; Elena E Stashenko; Jorge Luis Fuentes
Journal:  Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2012-06-23       Impact factor: 1.771

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.