Effects of single and combined exposures of gold (nano versus ionic form) and gemfibrozil in a liver organ culture of Sparus aurata
In vitro methods have gained rising importance in ecotoxicology due to ethical concerns. The aim of this study was to assess the single and combined in vitro effects of gold, as nanoparticle (AuNPs) and ionic (Au+) form, and the pharmaceutical gemfibrozil (GEM). Sparus aurata liver organ culture was...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Marine pollution bulletin 2020-11, Vol.160, p.111665-111665, Article 111665 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 111665 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 111665 |
| container_title | Marine pollution bulletin |
| container_volume | 160 |
| creator | Barreto, A. Carvalho, A. Silva, D. Pinto, E. Almeida, A. Paíga, P. Correira-Sá, L. Delerue-Matos, C. Trindade, T. Soares, A.M.V.M. Hylland, K. Loureiro, S. Oliveira, M. |
| description | In vitro methods have gained rising importance in ecotoxicology due to ethical concerns. The aim of this study was to assess the single and combined in vitro effects of gold, as nanoparticle (AuNPs) and ionic (Au+) form, and the pharmaceutical gemfibrozil (GEM). Sparus aurata liver organ culture was exposed to gold (4 to 7200 μg·L−1), GEM (1.5 to 15,000 μg·L−1) and combination 80 μg·L−1 gold +150 μg·L−1 GEM for 24 h. Endpoints related with antioxidant status, peroxidative/genetic damage were assessed. AuNPs caused more effects than Au+, increasing catalase and glutathione reductase activities and damaging DNA and cellular membranes. Effects were dependent on AuNPs size, coating and concentration. GEM damaged DNA at an environmentally relevant concentration, 1.5 μg·L−1. Overall, the effects of the combined exposures were higher than the predicted, based on single exposures. This study showed that liver culture can be a useful model to study contaminants effects.
•In vitro, gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) damaged fish liver DNA and cellular membranes.•Gemfibrozil (GEM) caused DNA damage at 1.5 μg·L−1.•Overall, effects of AuNPs+GEM were higher than predicted, based on single exposures.•Liver organ culture proved sensitive and a valuable in vitro model. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111665 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_crist</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_cristin_nora_10852_85865</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0025326X20307839</els_id><sourcerecordid>2460761431</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c478t-c0e07aae4848d8a2fbbad4a9578a2c283c4e30078cfb696aab49827b0a1caec3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU9vFCEYh4mxiWvrZyiJl3qYlT8zwB6bplaTJh7swRt5h3lnw4aBEWYa9eoXL9tVD148Ecjz-73AQ8glZ1vOuHp_2E6Q5xT6NWwFE_WUc6W6F2TDjd41Uir5kmwYE10jhfr6irwu5cAY00LzDfl1O47olkLTSIuP-4AU4kBdmnofcaD4fU5lzfgM7FMY6FWEmOgj5rIW6lP0jo4pT--ec3ucRt_n9NMH6iMFGnwlacp7iNStYalVx6YvM-QahzXDAhfkbIRQ8M3v9Zw8fLh9uPnY3H---3Rzfd-4VpulcQyZBsDWtGYwIMa-h6GFXafrxgkjXYuyvsu4sVc7BdC3OyN0z4A7QCfPyeWp1mVfFh9tTBksZ6YT1nRGdZW4OhFzTt9WLIudfHEYAkRMa7GiVUwr3kpe0bf_oIe05livXyltjBCy05XSf0amUjKOds6-6vpRx9qjPXuwf-3Zoz17sleT16ck1g959JhtcR6jw8Hn6ssOyf-34wnPMqfv</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2478822357</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effects of single and combined exposures of gold (nano versus ionic form) and gemfibrozil in a liver organ culture of Sparus aurata</title><source>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Barreto, A. ; Carvalho, A. ; Silva, D. ; Pinto, E. ; Almeida, A. ; Paíga, P. ; Correira-Sá, L. ; Delerue-Matos, C. ; Trindade, T. ; Soares, A.M.V.M. ; Hylland, K. ; Loureiro, S. ; Oliveira, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Barreto, A. ; Carvalho, A. ; Silva, D. ; Pinto, E. ; Almeida, A. ; Paíga, P. ; Correira-Sá, L. ; Delerue-Matos, C. ; Trindade, T. ; Soares, A.M.V.M. ; Hylland, K. ; Loureiro, S. ; Oliveira, M.</creatorcontrib><description>In vitro methods have gained rising importance in ecotoxicology due to ethical concerns. The aim of this study was to assess the single and combined in vitro effects of gold, as nanoparticle (AuNPs) and ionic (Au+) form, and the pharmaceutical gemfibrozil (GEM). Sparus aurata liver organ culture was exposed to gold (4 to 7200 μg·L−1), GEM (1.5 to 15,000 μg·L−1) and combination 80 μg·L−1 gold +150 μg·L−1 GEM for 24 h. Endpoints related with antioxidant status, peroxidative/genetic damage were assessed. AuNPs caused more effects than Au+, increasing catalase and glutathione reductase activities and damaging DNA and cellular membranes. Effects were dependent on AuNPs size, coating and concentration. GEM damaged DNA at an environmentally relevant concentration, 1.5 μg·L−1. Overall, the effects of the combined exposures were higher than the predicted, based on single exposures. This study showed that liver culture can be a useful model to study contaminants effects.
•In vitro, gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) damaged fish liver DNA and cellular membranes.•Gemfibrozil (GEM) caused DNA damage at 1.5 μg·L−1.•Overall, effects of AuNPs+GEM were higher than predicted, based on single exposures.•Liver organ culture proved sensitive and a valuable in vitro model.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0025-326X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-3363</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111665</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Antioxidants ; Catalase ; Cell culture ; Cell membranes ; Chromosome aberrations ; Contaminants ; Damage assessment ; Deoxyribonucleic acid ; DNA ; DNA damage ; DNA integrity ; Ecotoxicology ; Exposure ; Fish liver culture ; Gemfibrozil ; Gilthead seabream ; Glutathione ; Glutathione reductase ; Gold ; In vitro methods and tests ; Ionic gold ; Liver ; Membranes ; Nanoparticles ; Nanotoxicology ; Organ culture ; Oxidative stress ; Reductases ; Sparus aurata</subject><ispartof>Marine pollution bulletin, 2020-11, Vol.160, p.111665-111665, Article 111665</ispartof><rights>2020</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier BV Nov 2020</rights><rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c478t-c0e07aae4848d8a2fbbad4a9578a2c283c4e30078cfb696aab49827b0a1caec3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c478t-c0e07aae4848d8a2fbbad4a9578a2c283c4e30078cfb696aab49827b0a1caec3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X20307839$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,3537,26544,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Barreto, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carvalho, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silva, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pinto, E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Almeida, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paíga, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Correira-Sá, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delerue-Matos, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trindade, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soares, A.M.V.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hylland, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Loureiro, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oliveira, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Effects of single and combined exposures of gold (nano versus ionic form) and gemfibrozil in a liver organ culture of Sparus aurata</title><title>Marine pollution bulletin</title><description>In vitro methods have gained rising importance in ecotoxicology due to ethical concerns. The aim of this study was to assess the single and combined in vitro effects of gold, as nanoparticle (AuNPs) and ionic (Au+) form, and the pharmaceutical gemfibrozil (GEM). Sparus aurata liver organ culture was exposed to gold (4 to 7200 μg·L−1), GEM (1.5 to 15,000 μg·L−1) and combination 80 μg·L−1 gold +150 μg·L−1 GEM for 24 h. Endpoints related with antioxidant status, peroxidative/genetic damage were assessed. AuNPs caused more effects than Au+, increasing catalase and glutathione reductase activities and damaging DNA and cellular membranes. Effects were dependent on AuNPs size, coating and concentration. GEM damaged DNA at an environmentally relevant concentration, 1.5 μg·L−1. Overall, the effects of the combined exposures were higher than the predicted, based on single exposures. This study showed that liver culture can be a useful model to study contaminants effects.
•In vitro, gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) damaged fish liver DNA and cellular membranes.•Gemfibrozil (GEM) caused DNA damage at 1.5 μg·L−1.•Overall, effects of AuNPs+GEM were higher than predicted, based on single exposures.•Liver organ culture proved sensitive and a valuable in vitro model.</description><subject>Antioxidants</subject><subject>Catalase</subject><subject>Cell culture</subject><subject>Cell membranes</subject><subject>Chromosome aberrations</subject><subject>Contaminants</subject><subject>Damage assessment</subject><subject>Deoxyribonucleic acid</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>DNA damage</subject><subject>DNA integrity</subject><subject>Ecotoxicology</subject><subject>Exposure</subject><subject>Fish liver culture</subject><subject>Gemfibrozil</subject><subject>Gilthead seabream</subject><subject>Glutathione</subject><subject>Glutathione reductase</subject><subject>Gold</subject><subject>In vitro methods and tests</subject><subject>Ionic gold</subject><subject>Liver</subject><subject>Membranes</subject><subject>Nanoparticles</subject><subject>Nanotoxicology</subject><subject>Organ culture</subject><subject>Oxidative stress</subject><subject>Reductases</subject><subject>Sparus aurata</subject><issn>0025-326X</issn><issn>1879-3363</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>3HK</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU9vFCEYh4mxiWvrZyiJl3qYlT8zwB6bplaTJh7swRt5h3lnw4aBEWYa9eoXL9tVD148Ecjz-73AQ8glZ1vOuHp_2E6Q5xT6NWwFE_WUc6W6F2TDjd41Uir5kmwYE10jhfr6irwu5cAY00LzDfl1O47olkLTSIuP-4AU4kBdmnofcaD4fU5lzfgM7FMY6FWEmOgj5rIW6lP0jo4pT--ec3ucRt_n9NMH6iMFGnwlacp7iNStYalVx6YvM-QahzXDAhfkbIRQ8M3v9Zw8fLh9uPnY3H---3Rzfd-4VpulcQyZBsDWtGYwIMa-h6GFXafrxgkjXYuyvsu4sVc7BdC3OyN0z4A7QCfPyeWp1mVfFh9tTBksZ6YT1nRGdZW4OhFzTt9WLIudfHEYAkRMa7GiVUwr3kpe0bf_oIe05livXyltjBCy05XSf0amUjKOds6-6vpRx9qjPXuwf-3Zoz17sleT16ck1g959JhtcR6jw8Hn6ssOyf-34wnPMqfv</recordid><startdate>20201101</startdate><enddate>20201101</enddate><creator>Barreto, A.</creator><creator>Carvalho, A.</creator><creator>Silva, D.</creator><creator>Pinto, E.</creator><creator>Almeida, A.</creator><creator>Paíga, P.</creator><creator>Correira-Sá, L.</creator><creator>Delerue-Matos, C.</creator><creator>Trindade, T.</creator><creator>Soares, A.M.V.M.</creator><creator>Hylland, K.</creator><creator>Loureiro, S.</creator><creator>Oliveira, M.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier BV</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>3HK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20201101</creationdate><title>Effects of single and combined exposures of gold (nano versus ionic form) and gemfibrozil in a liver organ culture of Sparus aurata</title><author>Barreto, A. ; Carvalho, A. ; Silva, D. ; Pinto, E. ; Almeida, A. ; Paíga, P. ; Correira-Sá, L. ; Delerue-Matos, C. ; Trindade, T. ; Soares, A.M.V.M. ; Hylland, K. ; Loureiro, S. ; Oliveira, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c478t-c0e07aae4848d8a2fbbad4a9578a2c283c4e30078cfb696aab49827b0a1caec3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Antioxidants</topic><topic>Catalase</topic><topic>Cell culture</topic><topic>Cell membranes</topic><topic>Chromosome aberrations</topic><topic>Contaminants</topic><topic>Damage assessment</topic><topic>Deoxyribonucleic acid</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>DNA damage</topic><topic>DNA integrity</topic><topic>Ecotoxicology</topic><topic>Exposure</topic><topic>Fish liver culture</topic><topic>Gemfibrozil</topic><topic>Gilthead seabream</topic><topic>Glutathione</topic><topic>Glutathione reductase</topic><topic>Gold</topic><topic>In vitro methods and tests</topic><topic>Ionic gold</topic><topic>Liver</topic><topic>Membranes</topic><topic>Nanoparticles</topic><topic>Nanotoxicology</topic><topic>Organ culture</topic><topic>Oxidative stress</topic><topic>Reductases</topic><topic>Sparus aurata</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Barreto, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carvalho, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silva, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pinto, E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Almeida, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paíga, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Correira-Sá, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delerue-Matos, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trindade, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soares, A.M.V.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hylland, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Loureiro, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oliveira, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</collection><jtitle>Marine pollution bulletin</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Barreto, A.</au><au>Carvalho, A.</au><au>Silva, D.</au><au>Pinto, E.</au><au>Almeida, A.</au><au>Paíga, P.</au><au>Correira-Sá, L.</au><au>Delerue-Matos, C.</au><au>Trindade, T.</au><au>Soares, A.M.V.M.</au><au>Hylland, K.</au><au>Loureiro, S.</au><au>Oliveira, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effects of single and combined exposures of gold (nano versus ionic form) and gemfibrozil in a liver organ culture of Sparus aurata</atitle><jtitle>Marine pollution bulletin</jtitle><date>2020-11-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>160</volume><spage>111665</spage><epage>111665</epage><pages>111665-111665</pages><artnum>111665</artnum><issn>0025-326X</issn><eissn>1879-3363</eissn><abstract>In vitro methods have gained rising importance in ecotoxicology due to ethical concerns. The aim of this study was to assess the single and combined in vitro effects of gold, as nanoparticle (AuNPs) and ionic (Au+) form, and the pharmaceutical gemfibrozil (GEM). Sparus aurata liver organ culture was exposed to gold (4 to 7200 μg·L−1), GEM (1.5 to 15,000 μg·L−1) and combination 80 μg·L−1 gold +150 μg·L−1 GEM for 24 h. Endpoints related with antioxidant status, peroxidative/genetic damage were assessed. AuNPs caused more effects than Au+, increasing catalase and glutathione reductase activities and damaging DNA and cellular membranes. Effects were dependent on AuNPs size, coating and concentration. GEM damaged DNA at an environmentally relevant concentration, 1.5 μg·L−1. Overall, the effects of the combined exposures were higher than the predicted, based on single exposures. This study showed that liver culture can be a useful model to study contaminants effects.
•In vitro, gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) damaged fish liver DNA and cellular membranes.•Gemfibrozil (GEM) caused DNA damage at 1.5 μg·L−1.•Overall, effects of AuNPs+GEM were higher than predicted, based on single exposures.•Liver organ culture proved sensitive and a valuable in vitro model.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111665</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0025-326X |
| ispartof | Marine pollution bulletin, 2020-11, Vol.160, p.111665-111665, Article 111665 |
| issn | 0025-326X 1879-3363 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_cristin_nora_10852_85865 |
| source | NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Antioxidants Catalase Cell culture Cell membranes Chromosome aberrations Contaminants Damage assessment Deoxyribonucleic acid DNA DNA damage DNA integrity Ecotoxicology Exposure Fish liver culture Gemfibrozil Gilthead seabream Glutathione Glutathione reductase Gold In vitro methods and tests Ionic gold Liver Membranes Nanoparticles Nanotoxicology Organ culture Oxidative stress Reductases Sparus aurata |
| title | Effects of single and combined exposures of gold (nano versus ionic form) and gemfibrozil in a liver organ culture of Sparus aurata |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T02%3A29%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_crist&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effects%20of%20single%20and%20combined%20exposures%20of%20gold%20(nano%20versus%20ionic%20form)%20and%20gemfibrozil%20in%20a%20liver%20organ%20culture%20of%20Sparus%20aurata&rft.jtitle=Marine%20pollution%20bulletin&rft.au=Barreto,%20A.&rft.date=2020-11-01&rft.volume=160&rft.spage=111665&rft.epage=111665&rft.pages=111665-111665&rft.artnum=111665&rft.issn=0025-326X&rft.eissn=1879-3363&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111665&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_crist%3E2460761431%3C/proquest_crist%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2478822357&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0025326X20307839&rfr_iscdi=true |