Comparative effect of technical and commercial formulations of methamidophos on sperm quality and DNA integrity in mice

Methamidophos (MET), widely used in developing countries, is a highly neurotoxic organophosphate pesticide that has been associated with male reproductive alterations. Commercial formulations of pesticides used by agricultural workers and urban sprayers are responsible for thousands of intoxications...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Environmental toxicology 2014-08, Vol.29 (8), p.942-949
Hauptverfasser: Urióstegui‐Acosta, Mayrut, Hernández‐Ochoa, Isabel, de Jesús Solís‐Heredia, María, Martínez‐Aguilar, Gerardo, Quintanilla‐Vega, Betzabet
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 949
container_issue 8
container_start_page 942
container_title Environmental toxicology
container_volume 29
creator Urióstegui‐Acosta, Mayrut
Hernández‐Ochoa, Isabel
de Jesús Solís‐Heredia, María
Martínez‐Aguilar, Gerardo
Quintanilla‐Vega, Betzabet
description Methamidophos (MET), widely used in developing countries, is a highly neurotoxic organophosphate pesticide that has been associated with male reproductive alterations. Commercial formulations of pesticides used by agricultural workers and urban sprayers are responsible for thousands of intoxications in developing countries and may not have the same effects as active pure ingredients. Therefore, we compared effects of MET technical (METt) and commercial (METc) grades on sperm quality and DNA integrity. Male mice were injected (intraperitoneal, i.p.) with METt or METc (3.75, 5, and 7 mg/kg bw/day/4 days) and sacrificed 24 h post‐treatment. Sperm cells collected from epididymis–vas deferens were evaluated for quality parameters, DNA damage by the comet assay, and lipoperoxidation by malondialdehyde (MDA) production. Erythrocyte acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity was evaluated by acetylthiocholine inhibition as an index of overall toxicity. A dose‐dependent AChE inhibition was observed with both formulations. Sperm quality was decreased after treatment with both MET compounds, but the commercial formulation showed stronger effects; a similar profile was observed with the DNA damage, being METc more genotoxic. None MET formulation increased MDA, suggesting no peroxidative damage involved. In summary, the commercial formulation of MET was more reprotoxic and genotoxic than the active pure ingredient, highlighting that commercial formulations must be considered for more appropriate risk assessment of pesticide exposures. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Environ Toxicol 29: 942–949, 2014.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/tox.21822
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1547847912</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1547847912</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4512-e8c85508753965d061fcac6c5277ba860dad405e47bdf96396aff9531e2c72bd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkUtv1DAUhS0EoqWw4A9AJDZs0tpO_JhlNaUdpKqt1AfsLI9zzbjEcWo7tPPv8cyULlhYvr7-ztXRPQh9JPiQYEyPcng6pERS-grtE0ZpLaiQr7c1rlssyR56l9I9xnjGGX-L9mhDKCON3EeP8-BHHXV2f6ACa8HkKtgqg1kNzui-0kNXmeA9ROPK04bop77gYUgb0ENeae-6MK5CaQxVGiH66mHSvcvrrfrk4rhyQ4ZfcdNxQ-WdgffojdV9gg_P9wG6Pf12M1_U55dn3-fH57VpGaE1SCMZw1KwpljvMCfWaMMNo0IsteS4012LGbRi2dkZL5C2dsYaAtQIuuyaA_R1N3eM4WGClJV3yUDf6wHClBRhrZCtmBFa0C__ofdhikNxt6EoZZRzWahPz9S09NCpMTqv41r9W2kBjnbAo-th_fJPsNpkpUpWapuVurn8uS2Kot4pXMrw9KLQ8bfiohFM_bg4U6fXd3cLdrVQV4X_vOOtDkqXtSZ1e00xaXE5xaVs_gIOaZ83</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1542252668</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative effect of technical and commercial formulations of methamidophos on sperm quality and DNA integrity in mice</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Urióstegui‐Acosta, Mayrut ; Hernández‐Ochoa, Isabel ; de Jesús Solís‐Heredia, María ; Martínez‐Aguilar, Gerardo ; Quintanilla‐Vega, Betzabet</creator><creatorcontrib>Urióstegui‐Acosta, Mayrut ; Hernández‐Ochoa, Isabel ; de Jesús Solís‐Heredia, María ; Martínez‐Aguilar, Gerardo ; Quintanilla‐Vega, Betzabet</creatorcontrib><description>Methamidophos (MET), widely used in developing countries, is a highly neurotoxic organophosphate pesticide that has been associated with male reproductive alterations. Commercial formulations of pesticides used by agricultural workers and urban sprayers are responsible for thousands of intoxications in developing countries and may not have the same effects as active pure ingredients. Therefore, we compared effects of MET technical (METt) and commercial (METc) grades on sperm quality and DNA integrity. Male mice were injected (intraperitoneal, i.p.) with METt or METc (3.75, 5, and 7 mg/kg bw/day/4 days) and sacrificed 24 h post‐treatment. Sperm cells collected from epididymis–vas deferens were evaluated for quality parameters, DNA damage by the comet assay, and lipoperoxidation by malondialdehyde (MDA) production. Erythrocyte acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity was evaluated by acetylthiocholine inhibition as an index of overall toxicity. A dose‐dependent AChE inhibition was observed with both formulations. Sperm quality was decreased after treatment with both MET compounds, but the commercial formulation showed stronger effects; a similar profile was observed with the DNA damage, being METc more genotoxic. None MET formulation increased MDA, suggesting no peroxidative damage involved. In summary, the commercial formulation of MET was more reprotoxic and genotoxic than the active pure ingredient, highlighting that commercial formulations must be considered for more appropriate risk assessment of pesticide exposures. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Environ Toxicol 29: 942–949, 2014.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1520-4081</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1522-7278</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/tox.21822</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23125138</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ETOXFH</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: John Wiley &amp; Sons</publisher><subject>acetylcholinesterase ; Acetylcholinesterase - blood ; Animals ; Comet Assay ; developing countries ; DNA ; DNA - pharmacology ; DNA Damage ; erythrocytes ; Erythrocytes - drug effects ; Erythrocytes - enzymology ; farm labor ; genotoxicity ; ingredients ; Lipid Peroxidation ; Male ; male reproduction ; malondialdehyde ; Malondialdehyde - metabolism ; methamidophos ; Mice ; Mice, Inbred ICR ; neurotoxicity ; organophosphate pesticides ; Organothiophosphorus Compounds - toxicity ; Pesticides - toxicity ; Reproduction - drug effects ; risk assessment ; sperm DNA damage ; spermatozoa ; Spermatozoa - cytology ; Spermatozoa - drug effects</subject><ispartof>Environmental toxicology, 2014-08, Vol.29 (8), p.942-949</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., a Wiley company</rights><rights>Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., a Wiley company.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4512-e8c85508753965d061fcac6c5277ba860dad405e47bdf96396aff9531e2c72bd3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Ftox.21822$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Ftox.21822$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23125138$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Urióstegui‐Acosta, Mayrut</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hernández‐Ochoa, Isabel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Jesús Solís‐Heredia, María</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martínez‐Aguilar, Gerardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quintanilla‐Vega, Betzabet</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative effect of technical and commercial formulations of methamidophos on sperm quality and DNA integrity in mice</title><title>Environmental toxicology</title><addtitle>Environ. Toxicol</addtitle><description>Methamidophos (MET), widely used in developing countries, is a highly neurotoxic organophosphate pesticide that has been associated with male reproductive alterations. Commercial formulations of pesticides used by agricultural workers and urban sprayers are responsible for thousands of intoxications in developing countries and may not have the same effects as active pure ingredients. Therefore, we compared effects of MET technical (METt) and commercial (METc) grades on sperm quality and DNA integrity. Male mice were injected (intraperitoneal, i.p.) with METt or METc (3.75, 5, and 7 mg/kg bw/day/4 days) and sacrificed 24 h post‐treatment. Sperm cells collected from epididymis–vas deferens were evaluated for quality parameters, DNA damage by the comet assay, and lipoperoxidation by malondialdehyde (MDA) production. Erythrocyte acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity was evaluated by acetylthiocholine inhibition as an index of overall toxicity. A dose‐dependent AChE inhibition was observed with both formulations. Sperm quality was decreased after treatment with both MET compounds, but the commercial formulation showed stronger effects; a similar profile was observed with the DNA damage, being METc more genotoxic. None MET formulation increased MDA, suggesting no peroxidative damage involved. In summary, the commercial formulation of MET was more reprotoxic and genotoxic than the active pure ingredient, highlighting that commercial formulations must be considered for more appropriate risk assessment of pesticide exposures. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Environ Toxicol 29: 942–949, 2014.</description><subject>acetylcholinesterase</subject><subject>Acetylcholinesterase - blood</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Comet Assay</subject><subject>developing countries</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>DNA - pharmacology</subject><subject>DNA Damage</subject><subject>erythrocytes</subject><subject>Erythrocytes - drug effects</subject><subject>Erythrocytes - enzymology</subject><subject>farm labor</subject><subject>genotoxicity</subject><subject>ingredients</subject><subject>Lipid Peroxidation</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>male reproduction</subject><subject>malondialdehyde</subject><subject>Malondialdehyde - metabolism</subject><subject>methamidophos</subject><subject>Mice</subject><subject>Mice, Inbred ICR</subject><subject>neurotoxicity</subject><subject>organophosphate pesticides</subject><subject>Organothiophosphorus Compounds - toxicity</subject><subject>Pesticides - toxicity</subject><subject>Reproduction - drug effects</subject><subject>risk assessment</subject><subject>sperm DNA damage</subject><subject>spermatozoa</subject><subject>Spermatozoa - cytology</subject><subject>Spermatozoa - drug effects</subject><issn>1520-4081</issn><issn>1522-7278</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkUtv1DAUhS0EoqWw4A9AJDZs0tpO_JhlNaUdpKqt1AfsLI9zzbjEcWo7tPPv8cyULlhYvr7-ztXRPQh9JPiQYEyPcng6pERS-grtE0ZpLaiQr7c1rlssyR56l9I9xnjGGX-L9mhDKCON3EeP8-BHHXV2f6ACa8HkKtgqg1kNzui-0kNXmeA9ROPK04bop77gYUgb0ENeae-6MK5CaQxVGiH66mHSvcvrrfrk4rhyQ4ZfcdNxQ-WdgffojdV9gg_P9wG6Pf12M1_U55dn3-fH57VpGaE1SCMZw1KwpljvMCfWaMMNo0IsteS4012LGbRi2dkZL5C2dsYaAtQIuuyaA_R1N3eM4WGClJV3yUDf6wHClBRhrZCtmBFa0C__ofdhikNxt6EoZZRzWahPz9S09NCpMTqv41r9W2kBjnbAo-th_fJPsNpkpUpWapuVurn8uS2Kot4pXMrw9KLQ8bfiohFM_bg4U6fXd3cLdrVQV4X_vOOtDkqXtSZ1e00xaXE5xaVs_gIOaZ83</recordid><startdate>201408</startdate><enddate>201408</enddate><creator>Urióstegui‐Acosta, Mayrut</creator><creator>Hernández‐Ochoa, Isabel</creator><creator>de Jesús Solís‐Heredia, María</creator><creator>Martínez‐Aguilar, Gerardo</creator><creator>Quintanilla‐Vega, Betzabet</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7TV</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201408</creationdate><title>Comparative effect of technical and commercial formulations of methamidophos on sperm quality and DNA integrity in mice</title><author>Urióstegui‐Acosta, Mayrut ; Hernández‐Ochoa, Isabel ; de Jesús Solís‐Heredia, María ; Martínez‐Aguilar, Gerardo ; Quintanilla‐Vega, Betzabet</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4512-e8c85508753965d061fcac6c5277ba860dad405e47bdf96396aff9531e2c72bd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>acetylcholinesterase</topic><topic>Acetylcholinesterase - blood</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Comet Assay</topic><topic>developing countries</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>DNA - pharmacology</topic><topic>DNA Damage</topic><topic>erythrocytes</topic><topic>Erythrocytes - drug effects</topic><topic>Erythrocytes - enzymology</topic><topic>farm labor</topic><topic>genotoxicity</topic><topic>ingredients</topic><topic>Lipid Peroxidation</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>male reproduction</topic><topic>malondialdehyde</topic><topic>Malondialdehyde - metabolism</topic><topic>methamidophos</topic><topic>Mice</topic><topic>Mice, Inbred ICR</topic><topic>neurotoxicity</topic><topic>organophosphate pesticides</topic><topic>Organothiophosphorus Compounds - toxicity</topic><topic>Pesticides - toxicity</topic><topic>Reproduction - drug effects</topic><topic>risk assessment</topic><topic>sperm DNA damage</topic><topic>spermatozoa</topic><topic>Spermatozoa - cytology</topic><topic>Spermatozoa - drug effects</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Urióstegui‐Acosta, Mayrut</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hernández‐Ochoa, Isabel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Jesús Solís‐Heredia, María</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martínez‐Aguilar, Gerardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quintanilla‐Vega, Betzabet</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution &amp; Environmental Quality</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Environmental toxicology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Urióstegui‐Acosta, Mayrut</au><au>Hernández‐Ochoa, Isabel</au><au>de Jesús Solís‐Heredia, María</au><au>Martínez‐Aguilar, Gerardo</au><au>Quintanilla‐Vega, Betzabet</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative effect of technical and commercial formulations of methamidophos on sperm quality and DNA integrity in mice</atitle><jtitle>Environmental toxicology</jtitle><addtitle>Environ. Toxicol</addtitle><date>2014-08</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>942</spage><epage>949</epage><pages>942-949</pages><issn>1520-4081</issn><eissn>1522-7278</eissn><coden>ETOXFH</coden><abstract>Methamidophos (MET), widely used in developing countries, is a highly neurotoxic organophosphate pesticide that has been associated with male reproductive alterations. Commercial formulations of pesticides used by agricultural workers and urban sprayers are responsible for thousands of intoxications in developing countries and may not have the same effects as active pure ingredients. Therefore, we compared effects of MET technical (METt) and commercial (METc) grades on sperm quality and DNA integrity. Male mice were injected (intraperitoneal, i.p.) with METt or METc (3.75, 5, and 7 mg/kg bw/day/4 days) and sacrificed 24 h post‐treatment. Sperm cells collected from epididymis–vas deferens were evaluated for quality parameters, DNA damage by the comet assay, and lipoperoxidation by malondialdehyde (MDA) production. Erythrocyte acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity was evaluated by acetylthiocholine inhibition as an index of overall toxicity. A dose‐dependent AChE inhibition was observed with both formulations. Sperm quality was decreased after treatment with both MET compounds, but the commercial formulation showed stronger effects; a similar profile was observed with the DNA damage, being METc more genotoxic. None MET formulation increased MDA, suggesting no peroxidative damage involved. In summary, the commercial formulation of MET was more reprotoxic and genotoxic than the active pure ingredient, highlighting that commercial formulations must be considered for more appropriate risk assessment of pesticide exposures. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Environ Toxicol 29: 942–949, 2014.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons</pub><pmid>23125138</pmid><doi>10.1002/tox.21822</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1520-4081
ispartof Environmental toxicology, 2014-08, Vol.29 (8), p.942-949
issn 1520-4081
1522-7278
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1547847912
source MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library
subjects acetylcholinesterase
Acetylcholinesterase - blood
Animals
Comet Assay
developing countries
DNA
DNA - pharmacology
DNA Damage
erythrocytes
Erythrocytes - drug effects
Erythrocytes - enzymology
farm labor
genotoxicity
ingredients
Lipid Peroxidation
Male
male reproduction
malondialdehyde
Malondialdehyde - metabolism
methamidophos
Mice
Mice, Inbred ICR
neurotoxicity
organophosphate pesticides
Organothiophosphorus Compounds - toxicity
Pesticides - toxicity
Reproduction - drug effects
risk assessment
sperm DNA damage
spermatozoa
Spermatozoa - cytology
Spermatozoa - drug effects
title Comparative effect of technical and commercial formulations of methamidophos on sperm quality and DNA integrity in mice
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T22%3A10%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20effect%20of%20technical%20and%20commercial%20formulations%20of%20methamidophos%20on%20sperm%20quality%20and%20DNA%20integrity%20in%20mice&rft.jtitle=Environmental%20toxicology&rft.au=Uri%C3%B3stegui%E2%80%90Acosta,%20Mayrut&rft.date=2014-08&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=942&rft.epage=949&rft.pages=942-949&rft.issn=1520-4081&rft.eissn=1522-7278&rft.coden=ETOXFH&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/tox.21822&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1547847912%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1542252668&rft_id=info:pmid/23125138&rfr_iscdi=true