4.7 Article

Developmental, Behavioral and Transcriptomic Changes in Zebrafish Embryos after Smoke Dye Exposure

期刊

TOXICS
卷 10, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/toxics10050210

关键词

transcriptomics; pathway; zebrafish embryo test; behavior; smoke dye

资金

  1. US Army Installations and Operational Environment Program
  2. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [P30ES030287]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dyes Disperse Blue 14, Disperse Red 9, Solvent Red 169, and Solvent Yellow 33 have been found to adversely affect zebrafish embryos, with Disperse Blue 14 and Solvent Yellow 33 having the most significant impact on development and behavior.
(1) Background: Disperse Blue 14, Disperse Red 9, Solvent Red 169 and Solvent Yellow 33 have been used to color smoke; however, they have not been comprehensively assessed for their potential health hazards. (2) Methods: To assess the effects of these dyes, zebrafish embryos were exposed from 6 to 120 h post fertilization (hpf) to 10-55 mu M Disperse Red 9, 1-50 mu M Solvent Red 169, 7.5-13.5 mu M Solvent Yellow 33 or 133-314 mu M Disperse Blue 14. Embryos were monitored for adverse effects on gene expression at 48 hpf as well as for mortality, development and behavior at 120 hpf. The dyes were examined for their potential to cross the blood-brain barrier. (3) Results: Solvent Yellow 33 and Disperse Blue 14 impaired development and behavior at all concentrations. Disperse Red 9 impaired behavior at all concentrations and development at all concentrations except for 10 mu M. Solvent Red 169 caused no effects. Mortality was only seen in Disperse Blue 14 at 261.5 and 314 mu M. Gene expression indicated impacts on neurodevelopment and folate and retinol metabolism as potential mechanisms of toxicity. (4) Conclusions: Smoke dyes have a high potential for causing developmental changes and neurotoxicity and should be examined more closely using comprehensive approaches as used here.

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