4.7 Review

Arsenic toxicity in mammals and aquatic animals: A comparative biochemical approach

Journal

ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY
Volume 74, Issue 3, Pages 211-218

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2010.11.002

Keywords

Arsenic; Oxidative stress; Aquatic animals; Antioxidants; Glutathione-S-transferase omega; Arsenic methylation

Funding

  1. Brazilian agency CAPES [Proc. 089/2007]
  2. CNPq [475585/2004-6]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Arsenic (As) is a widespread pollutant in the world and its toxicity is related to its chemical form, with inorganic forms being considered more toxic than the organic form, and huge differences in effects and processes of metabolism. This paper reviews the potential biochemical mechanisms of uptake of arsenic by aquaporins, capacity for metabolism and cellular efflux of As. It is known that As can affect signaling pathways since it can activate proteins such as ERK2, p38 and JNK, as shown in mammals. A comparison between phosphorylation sites of these proteins is presented in order to determine whether the same effect triggered by As in mammals might be observed in aquatic animals. The toxicity resulting from As exposure is considered to be linked to an imbalance between pro-oxidant and antioxidant homeostasis that results in oxidative stress. So, present review analyzes examples of oxidative stress generation by arsenic. Biotransformation of As is a process where firstly the arsenate is converted into arsenite and then transformed into mono-, di-, and trimethylated products. In the methylation process, the role of the omega isoform of glutathione-S-transferase (GST) is discussed. In addition, a phylogenetic tree was constructed for aquaporin proteins of different species, including aquatic animals, taking into account their importance in trivalent arsenic uptake. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available