4.0 Article

RESPONSES OF ANTIOXIDANT ENZYMES AND HEAT SHOCK PROTEINS IN DROSOPHILA TO TREATMENT WITH A PESTICIDE MIXTURE

期刊

ARCHIVES OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
卷 67, 期 3, 页码 869-876

出版社

INST BIOLOSKA ISTRAZIVANJA SINISA STANKOVIC
DOI: 10.2298/ABS141031046D

关键词

Pesticide; qRT-PCR; antioxidant genes; HSP; Drosophila

类别

资金

  1. T.R. State Planning Organization [2011K120390]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effects of a mixture of seven pesticides were examined on the expression of antioxidant enzymes, Mn superoxide dismutase (Mn-SOD), catalase (CAT), glutathione synthetase (GS), and heat shock proteins (HSP) 26, 60, 70 and 83 in adult fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster Oregon R). The flies were reared under controlled conditions on artificial diets and treated with a mixture of seven pesticides (molinate, thiobencarb, linuron, phorate, primiphos-methyl, fenvalerate and lambda-cyhalothrin) commonly found in water, at concentrations of 0.1, 0.5 and 1 parts per billion (ppb) for 1 and 5 days. Quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) analysis of Mn-SOD, CAT and GS expression revealed that the analyzed markers responded significantly to pesticide-induced oxidative stress, in particular on the 5th day of treatment. On the 1st day of treatment, the relative expression of HSP26 and HSP60 genes increased only after exposure to the highest concentrations of pesticides, whereas HSP70 and HSP83 expression increased after exposure to 0.5 and 1 ppb. After five days of treatment, the expression of all HSP genes was increased after exposure to all pesticide concentrations. A positive correlation was determined between the relative expression levels of some HSPs (except HSP60), and antioxidant genes. The observed changes in antioxidant enzyme and HSP mRNA levels in D. melanogaster suggest that the permissible limits of pesticide concentrations for clean drinking water outlined in the regulations of several countries are potentially cytotoxic. The presented findings lend support for reevaluation of these limits.

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

4.0
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