4.7 Review

A new identity of microcystins: Environmental endocrine disruptors? An evidence-based review

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 851, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158262

关键词

Microcystins; Environmental endocrine disruptors; Key characteristics; Adverse health outcomes

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [82073512, 81773384]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review evaluates the rationality of classifying MCs as environmental endocrine disruptors (EDCs) and finds that MCs meet most of the key characteristics of EDCs and have endocrine-disrupting properties. The endocrine-disrupting effect of MCs may be an important cause of adverse health outcomes such as metabolic disorders and reproductive disorders.
Microcystins (MCs) are widely distributed cyanobacterial toxins in eutrophic waters. At present, the endocrine -disrupting effects of MCs have been extensively studied, but whether MCs can be classified as environmental endocrine disruptors (EDCs) is still unclear. This review is aimed to evaluate the rationality for MCs as to be classified as EDCs based on the available evidence. It has been identified that MCs meet eight of ten key characteristics of chemicals that can be classified as EDCs. MCs interfere with the six processes, including synthesis, release, circulation, metabo-lism, binding and action of natural hormones in the body. Also, they are fit two other characteristics of EDC: altering the fate of producing/responding cells and epigenetic modification. Further evidence indicates that the endocrine -disrupting effect of MCs may be an important cause of adverse health outcomes such as metabolic disorders, reproduc-tive disorders and effects on the growth and development of offspring. Generally, MCs have endocrine-disrupting properties, suggesting that it is reasonable for them to be considered EDCs. This is of great importance in understand-ing and evaluating the harm done by MCs on humans.

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