4.6 Article

Effects of redox cycling compounds on glutathione content and activity of glutathione-related enzymes in rainbow trout liver

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1532-0456(02)00129-1

关键词

oxidative stress; rainbow trout; paraquat; menadione; beta-naphthoflavone; naphthazarin; glutathione; glutathione-dependent enzymes; biomarkers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In fish, as in other aerobic organisms, glutathione and glutathione-related enzymes are important components in the defences against oxidative stress. To study if hepatic glutathione levels and/or activities of glutathione-related enzymes can act as indicators of oxidative stress in fish, we injected rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) intraperitoneally with paraquat (PQ), menadione (MD), naphthazarin (DHNQ), or beta-naphthoflavone (beta-NF), all known to cause a rise in reactive oxygen species (ROS). After 2 and 5 days of exposure, we measured the activities of hepatic glutathione peroxidase (GPox), glutathione S-transferase (GST), gamma-glutamylcysteine synthetase (GCS), and glutathione reductase (GR). We also measured total glutathione (tGSH) and oxidised glutathione (GSSG) in the liver of fish treated with PQ and MD. All chemicals caused an increase in GR activity after 5 days, which ranged from 160% in fish treated with beta-NF to 1500% in fish treated with PQ All chemicals except beta-NF caused moderate elevation in GST activity; GPox activity was lower in fish treated with DHNQ and MD, while GCS activity increased twofold in the fish treated with DHNQ, without being affected by beta-NF, PQ or MD. After 5 days of treatment with PQ or MD, tGSH content was elevated. Our findings demonstrated that of the parameters included in the study, GR activity was the most responsive to treatment with redox cycling compounds, indicating that GR activity is a promising biomarker of such compounds and possibly indicating oxidative stress in rainbow trout. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.

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