4.7 Article

The cytoskeleton as a non-cholinergic target of organophosphate compounds

期刊

CHEMICO-BIOLOGICAL INTERACTIONS
卷 346, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2021.109578

关键词

Adducts; Actin; Cytoskeleton; Non-cholinergic mechanism; Organophosphate; Tubulin

资金

  1. National Council of Science and Technology of Mexico (CONACyT) [153468, 780423]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Current research on organophosphate (OP) toxicity has shifted focus to potential non-cholinergic mechanisms as the inhibition of acetylcholinesterase (AChE) alone does not account for all adverse effects. New strategies for OP detection have identified cytoskeletal proteins as potential molecular targets, with evidence showing alterations in the cytoskeleton following OP exposure.
Current organophosphate (OP) toxicity research now considers potential non-cholinergic mechanisms for these compounds, since the inhibition of acetylcholinesterase (AChE) cannot completely explain all the adverse biological effects of OP. Thanks to the development of new strategies for OP detection, some potential molecular targets have been identified. Among these molecules are several cytoskeletal proteins, including actin, tubulin, intermediate filament proteins, and associated proteins, such as motor proteins, microtubule-associated proteins (MAPs), and cofilin. in vitro, ex vivo, and some in vivo reports have identified alterations in the cytoskeleton following OP exposure, including cell morphology defects, cells detachments, intracellular transport disruption, aberrant mitotic spindle formation, modification of cell motility, and reduced phagocytic capability, which implicate the cytoskeleton in OP toxicity. Here, we reviewed the evidence indicating the cytoskeletal targets of OP compounds, including their strategies, the potential effects of their alterations, and their possible participation in neurotoxicity, embryonic development, cell division, and immunotoxicity related to OP compounds exposure.

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