4.7 Article

Physicochemical properties, in vitro cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of PM1.0 and PM2.5 from Shanghai, China

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 24, 期 24, 页码 19508-19516

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-017-9626-9

关键词

PM1.0; Physicochemical properties; A549 cells; Cytotoxic effects; Genotoxic effects; DNA damage

资金

  1. Medical & Engineering Joint Fund of Shanghai City [YG2016QN76]
  2. Municipal Environmental Protection Bureau of Jiaxing [JXSJ-2014-73]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Exposure to ambient particulate matter (PM) links with a variety of respiratory diseases. However, compared with coarse particles (PM10) and fine particles (PM2.5), submicrometer particles (PM1.0) may be a more important indicator of human health risks. In this study, the cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of PM1.0 samples from Shanghai were examined using A549 cells, and compared with the effects of PM2.5, to better understand the health effects of PM1.0 in this area. The PM1.0 and PM2.5 samples were characterized for morphology, water-soluble inorganic ions, organic and elemental carbon, and metal elements. The cytotoxicity of PMs was measured using cell viability and cell membrane damage assays. The genotoxic effects of PMs were determined using the comet assay, and DNA damage was quantified using olive tail moment (OTM) values. The physicochemical characterization indicated that PM1.0 was enriched in carbonaceous elements and hazardous metals (Al, Zn, Pb, Mn, Cu, and V), whereas PM2.5 was more abundant in large, irregular mineral particles. The biological results revealed that both PM1.0 and PM2.5 could induce significant cytotoxicity and genotoxicity in A549 cells, and that exposure to PM1.0 caused more extensive toxic effects than exposure to PM2.5. The greater cytotoxic effects of PM1.0 can be attributed to the combined effects of size and chemical composition, whereas the genotoxic effects of PM1.0 may be mainly associated with chemical species.

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