4.4 Article

Comparative study of the use of neuroblastoma cells (Neuro-2a) and neuroblastorna x glioma hybrid cells (NG108-15) for the toxic effect quantification of marine toxins

Journal

TOXICON
Volume 52, Issue 4, Pages 541-550

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.toxicon.2008.06.028

Keywords

saxitoxin; brevetoxin; palytoxin; pectenotoxin; okadaic acid; dinophysistoxin; domoic acid; time-dependent cytotoxic evaluation; Neuro-2a; NG108-15

Funding

  1. INIA [ACU02-005, RTA2006-00103]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The suitability and sensitivity of two neural cell models, NG108-15 and Neuro-2a, to different marine toxins were evaluated under different incubation and exposure times and in the presence or absence of ouabain and veratridine (O/V). NG108-15 cells were more sensitive to pectenotoxin-2 than Neuro-2a cells. For saxitoxin, brevetoxin-3, palytoxin, okadaic acid and dinophysistoxin-1 both cell types proved to be sensitive and suitable for toxicity evaluation. For domoic acid preliminary results were presented. Setting incubation time and exposure time proved to be critical for the development of the assays. In order to reduce the duration of the assays, it was better to reduce cell time incubation previous to toxin exposure than exposure time. For palytoxin, after 24 h of growth, both cell types were sensitive in the absence of O/V. When growth time previous to toxin exposure was reduced, both cell types were unsensitive to palytoxin when O/V was absent. Although dinophysistoxin-1 and okadaic acid are both phosphatase inhibitors, these toxins did not respond similarly in front of the experimental conditions studied. Both cell types were able to identify Na-channel acting toxins and allowed to quantify the effect of saxitoxin, brevetoxin-3, palytoxin, okadaic acid, dinophysistoxin-1 and pectenotoxin-2 under different experimental conditions. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available