4.7 Article

Acute BPA exposure-induced oxidative stress, depressed immune genes expression and damage of hepatopancreas in red swamp crayfish Procambarus clarkii

期刊

FISH & SHELLFISH IMMUNOLOGY
卷 103, 期 -, 页码 95-102

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsi.2020.04.032

关键词

BPA; Hepatopancreas; Immune system; Antioxidant enzymes; Bacteria

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31800435, 31902411]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2019M661955]
  3. Jiangsu Province Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2019K189]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bisphenol A is a typical endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) and produce various toxic effects on animals due to its potential endocrine disruption, oxidative damage effect, mutagenic effect and hypomethylation. To study its effect on the immune system of crustaceans, the Procambarus clarkii were utilized to detect the immune related indicators after 225 mu g/L BPA exposure for 1 week. Hepatopancreatic histology and ultrastructure analysis showed that the brush border disappeared, the lumen increased, and the connection between the hepatic tubules fade away in BPA treated group. BPA could significantly increase the level of ROS, inhibit the activities of antioxidant-related enzymes (SOD, POD, and CAT), and thereby cause the oxidative stress. The enzyme activities of AKP, ACP and lysozyme in hepatopancreas after BPA exposure were also depressed even after Aeromonas hydrophila infections. The relative expression profiles of immune-related genes after BPA exposure and bacterial infection showed suppressed trends of most selected genes. Under A. hydrophila infections, the cumulative mortality of 225 mu g/L BPA-treated crayfish was significantly higher than other groups. All these results indicated that BPA exposure had adverse effects on the immune ability of P. clarkii. The present study will provide an important foundation for further understanding the effects of EDCs on crustacean immune functions.

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