4.5 Article

Temperature induces lead toxicity in Pangasius hypophthalmus: an acute test, antioxidative status and cellular metabolic stress

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13762-017-1364-5

关键词

Acute toxicity; Acetylcholine esterase; Carbohydrate metabolic enzymes; Protein metabolic enzymes; Pangasius hypophthalmus; Oxidative stress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Climate change and pollution are the most vulnerable stressors that are anticipated increasingly to affect all living organisms including fishes. The aquatic ecosystems are the most affected ecosystem due to contamination and global increasing temperature. In view of the above, the present study delineates 96-h median lethal concentration of heavy metal, lead alone and in combination with high temperature (34 A degrees C) by conducting static non-renewable acute toxicity bioassay in Pangasius hypophthalmus (average weight 3.65 +/- 0.75 g). Further, the effect of different definitive doses (80, 82, 84, 86, 88 and 90 mg/L) of lead alone and high temperature on cellular metabolic response was probed. The LC50 of lead was found to be 84.93 mg/L, whereas in combination with high temperature it was 83.10 mg/L in P. hypophthalmus. Catalase, superoxide dismutase and glutathione-S-transferase were noticeably higher (p < 0.01) in liver, gill and brain during lead exposure alone and in combination with high temperature. The activities of aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase were significantly enhanced (p < 0.01) in muscle, liver and gill in dose- and time-dependent manners in lead-alone-exposed and in combination with high-temperature groups. The brain and liver acetylcholine esterase activities showed noticeable (p < 0.01) inhibition from 80 to 90 mg/L exposure of lead alone and with concurrent exposure to temperature than the control group. Overall results clearly indicate that acute exposure of lead and high temperature led to pronounced deleterious alterations on cellular and metabolic activities of P. hypophthalmus.

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

4.5
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