4.7 Article

Studies on comparative efficacy of α-linolenic acid and α-eleostearic acid on prevention of organic mercury-induced oxidative stress in kidney and liver of rat

Journal

FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY
Volume 50, Issue 3-4, Pages 1066-1072

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2011.12.042

Keywords

alpha-Linolenic acid; alpha-Eleostearic acid; Oxidative stress; Antioxidant; Organic mercury; Methyl mercury

Funding

  1. Dept. of Chemical Technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The present study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of alpha-linolenic acid and alpha-eleostearic acid, two isomers of linolenic acid, against oxidative stress induced by organic mercury in kidney and liver cells of rat. Male albino rats were divided into six groups. Groups 1, 2 were normal control and methyl mercury chloride (MeHgCl) treated (5 mg/kg BW/day) control, respectively. Groups 3, 4, 5 and 6 were orally treated with different doses of two fatty acids (0.5% and 1.0% of total lipid given for each isomer) along with MeHgCl (5 mg/kg BW). Results showed that activity of antioxidant enzymes viz. catalase (CAT), superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione peroxidase (GPx), reduced glutathione (GSH) in liver and kidney decreased significantly due to oxidative stress generated by MeHg. Administration of the linolenic acid isomers almost restored all the altered parameters and also reduced lipid peroxidation and leakage of trans-aminase enzymes from liver to blood due to liver injury when administrated in higher doses. Histopathology of liver and kidney cells showed that administration of alpha-linolenic acid significantly reduced the damage generated by MeHg. Thus, alpha-linolenic acid and alpha-eleostearic acid could serve as cost-effective and natural phytochemical preparation to protect against the adverse effects caused by organic mercury in human. (C) 2012 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available