4.1 Article

Genotoxicity of three mycotoxin contaminants of rice: 28-day multi-endpoint assessment in rats

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2021.503369

Keywords

Pig-a assay; Genotoxicity; Combined toxicity; Deoxynivalenol; Zearalenone; Fumonisin B-1

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [8157120809]
  2. Creative Spark Project of Sichuan University [2018SCUH0005]
  3. Application Foundation Project of Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Province [2019YJ0020]
  4. Public Health and Preventive Medicine Laboratory Training Center

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that low doses of individual mycotoxins did not show significant genotoxicity, but certain combinations of mycotoxins could induce genotoxicity in tissues. In peripheral blood, the combination of DON and FB1 significantly induced micronuclei, while ZEN in the liver might exacerbate the DNA-damaging effects of DON and FB1.
Deoxynivalenol (DON), zearalenone (ZEN), and fumonisin B-1 (FB1), as the main mycotoxins contaminating rice, often coexist in food. Thus, we have measured the genotoxicity of the three rice fungal contaminants, singly and in different combinations, with a 28-day multi-endpoint (Pig-a assay + in vivo micronucleus [MN] test + comet assay) genotoxicity platform. Male Sprague-Dawley rats received the agents orally via gavage for 28 consecutive days, before performing the abovementioned tests. Results indicated that low dose of a single mycotoxin did not show significant genotoxicity. However, some of these mycotoxins in combination induced significant genotoxicity in the peripheral blood and tissues, at sacrifice. In the peripheral blood, the binary combination of DON and FB1 significantly induced MN. In the liver, ZEN might aggravate the DNA-damaging effects of DON and FB1. Therefore, the genotoxicity of sub-chronic exposure to mycotoxins in combination cannot be ignored.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available