4.6 Article

Cytogenetic markers and their spatial distribution in a population living in proximity to areas sprayed with pesticides

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.etap.2021.103736

关键词

Cytogenetic markers; Occupational exposure; Pesticides; Genotoxicity; Biomonitoring

资金

  1. Secretaria de Ciencia y Tecnica-Universidad Nacional de Rio Cuarto (SECyT-UNRC)
  2. Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnologia de la Provincia de Cordoba [000198/2011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human populations are exposed to varying amounts of potentially toxic substances, with work-related or direct exposure usually resulting in greater toxin levels than environmental exposure. This study focused on detecting genotoxic damage caused by pollutants in individuals exposed to pesticide mixtures in Argentina through the analysis of cytogenetic markers. While this method allows for rapid detection of direct damage, it is limited in estimating the degree of exposure.
Human populations are in contact with potentially toxic substances in varying amounts, if the exposure is workrelated or direct, generally the amount of toxin is usually greater than if the exposure is environmental through the drifts that occur. It was proposed to determine the existence of genotoxic damage evaluated through Chromosomal Aberrations and Micronuclei assays and their spatial distribution pattern, as well as the possible relationship between that damage and the values found in biochemical biomarkers, in groups of individuals environmental exposure (respiratory exposure) to mixtures of pesticides, in the province of C ' ordoba-Argentina. Biochemical and hematological determinations were made in each samples. The results reveal that the monitoring of human populations through the analysis of cytogenetic markers enabled the detection of direct damage in man caused by polluting substances and the results were obtained rapidly. The disadvantage of this type of study is the inability to estimate the degree of 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

4.6
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