4.2 Article

Vitamin E: An Antioxidant Therapy to Protect Endosulphan Induced Follicular Toxicity

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY
卷 7, 期 8, 页码 821-828

出版社

ASIAN NETWORK SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION-ANSINET
DOI: 10.3923/ijp.2011.821.828

关键词

Pesticide; endosulphan; vitamin E; follicle; granulosa cells; goat; Capra hircus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Endosulphan is a xenoestrogen that imitates the effect of estrogens, causing reproductive and developmental abnormalities in mammals. The aim of the present investigation was to analyze the effect of vitamin E in rescue of degenerating changes induced by endosulphan in granulosa cells of goat Capra hircus in vitro. On the basis of colour and texture normal follicles (3-5 mm in diameter) were selected for the tissue culture. The follicles were divided into two groups (one control+two experimental groups). Experimental group (A) was exposed with 100 nmol mL(-1) endosulphan concentration. Experimental group (B) was exposed with 100 nmol mL(-1) endosulphan as well as supplemented with 100 mu mol L(-1) concentration of vitamin E (alpha-Tocopherol). Harvesting was carried out after 1 h, 4 h and 8 h of exposure. Control was run simultaneously along with all the experimental groups. Endosulphan at dose level 100 nmol mL(-1) induced a decline in cell diameter from 7.5 +/- 0.0456 in control to 4.5 +/- 0.1024, 3.7 +/- 0.1001 and 3.2 +/- 0.1154 mu m after exposure of 1, 4 and 8 h, respectively but in case of endosulphan supplemented with vitamin E, there was less decline in cell diameter that was 6.4 +/- 0.1235, 4.8 +/- 0.1809 and 4.1 +/- 0.0809 mu m after exposure of 1,4 and 8 h, respectively. Endosulphan induced atretogenic changes like hyalinization of granulosa cells, crinkled and wavy membranes and pycnosis and thus affects the functions in adult goat due to the oxidative stress. Vitamin E treatment at dose level 100 mu mol L(-1) in experimental group (B) these atretogenic changes were milder and restore the normal structure of granulosa cells.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据