4.7 Article

Interactive effects of selected pharmaceutical mixtures on bioaccumulation and biochemical status in crucian carp (Carassius auratus)

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 148, 期 -, 页码 21-31

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.01.017

关键词

Pharmaceutical; Mixture; Interaction; Carassius auratus; Bioaccumulation; Biomarker

资金

  1. National Science Funds for Creative Research Groups of China [51421006]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51279061]
  3. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to evaluate the interactive effects of fluoxetine (FLU), roxithromycin (ROX) and propranolol (PRP) on the bioaccumulation and biochemical responses in the crucian carp Carassius auratus. After 7 days of binary exposure (ROX + FLU and PRP + FLU), the addition of waterborne FLU at nominal concentrations of 4, 20 and 100 mu g L-1 significantly increased the accumulation of ROX and PRP in fish livers in most cases, although elevated ROX and PRP bioaccumulation levels were not observed in muscles or gills. The inductive response of 7-ethoxyresorufin 0-deethylase (EROD) to PRP and that of 7-benzyloxy-4-trifluoromethyl-coumarin 0-dibenzyloxylase (BFCOD) to ROX were inhibited by the co-administration of FLU at all tested concentrations. Correspondingly, marked inhibition of CYP1A and CYP3A mRNA expression levels was observed in the livers of fish co-treated with FLU + PRP and FLU + ROX relative to their PRP- and ROX-only counterparts, respectively. In addition, as reflected by superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity and malondialdehyde (MDA) content, co-exposure to ROX + FLU and PRP + FLU seemed to induce stronger antioxidant responses than single pharmaceutical exposure in fish livers. This work indicated that the interactive effects of pharmaceutical mixtures could lead to perturbations in the bioaccumulation and biochemical responses in fish. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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