4.7 Article

Biochemical effect evaluation of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid-contaminated wood mice (Apodemus sylvaticus)

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES
Volume 112, Issue 6, Pages 681-686

Publisher

US DEPT HEALTH HUMAN SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1289/ehp.6479

Keywords

alanine aminotransferase; bioaccumulation; microsomal lipid peroxidation; PFOS; relative liver weight; wood mouse

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Wood mice (Apodemus. sylvaticus) were captured at Blokkersdijk, a nature reserve in the immediate vicinity of a fluorochemical plant in Antwerp, Belgium, and at Galgenweel, 3 kilometers farther away. The liver perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) concentrations in the Blokkersdijk mice were extremely high (0.47-178.55 mug/g wet weight). Perfluorononanoic, perfluorodecanoic, perfluoroundecanoic, and perfluorododecanoic acids were found sporadically in the liver tissue of the Blokkersdijk mice. The liver PFOS concentrations at Galgenweel were significantly lower than those at Blokkersdijk (0.14-1.11 mug/g wet weight). Further results suggest sex independence of the liver PFOS levels, increased levels of PFOS bioaccumulation in older mice, and maternal PFOS transfer to the young. Several liver end points were significantly elevated in the Blokkersdijk mice: liver weight, relative liver weight, peroxisomal P-oxidation activity, microsomal lipid peroxidation level, and mitochondrial fraction protein content. For the mitochondrial fraction catalase activity, no significant difference between locations was found. The liver weight, relative liver weight, and liver microsomal lipid peroxidation level increased significantly with the liver PFOS concentration. No indications for PFOS-mediated effects on the serum triglyceride, cholesterol, or potassium levels were obtained. The liver PFOS concentration was negatively related to the serum alanine aminotransferase activity.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available