4.6 Article

Intestinal microflora plays a crucial role in the genotoxicity of the cooked food mutagen 2-amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoline (IQ)

期刊

CARCINOGENESIS
卷 22, 期 10, 页码 1721-1725

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/carcin/22.10.1721

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the impact of the intestinal microflora on the genotoxicity of 2-amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5-f] quinoline (IQ), a mutagenic/carcinogenic heterocyclic amine commonly found in fried meats and fish. In parallel, we also examined the effect of the microflora on the protective effect of glucotropaeolin (GT), a glucosinolate contained in cruciferous vegetables, towards IQ-induced genotoxic effect. Conventional (NF), human flora associated (HFA) and germ free (GF) rats were treated either with 90 mg/kg IQ alone, 150 mg/kg GT alone or a combination of the two by gavage and DNA damage was determined in liver and colon cells using the alkaline single cell gel electrophoresis (SCGE) or comet assay. IQ caused a significant effect in both organs of all groups. However, DNA damage was most pronounced in NF animals. In colon cells, DNA migration was 6-fold more in IQ-exposed rats as compared with untreated controls. The effect measured with liver cells was similar. In comparison to NF rats, in HFA rats, tail length of the comets was 22 and 53% lower in liver and colon cells, respectively. Significantly weaker effects were seen in GF animals (66 and 75% lower damage in hepatocytes and colonocytes, respectively, than in NF animals). Pretreatment with GT led to a complete reduction of IQ-induced DNA damage regardless of the microbial status of the animals. In addition, a moderate decrease in spontaneous DNA damage was seen in animals that received GT alone. Our results show that the microflora has a strong impact on the genotoxic effects of IQ. We conclude that the alkaline SCGE assay with rats harbouring different flora opens new possibilities to investigate the role of intestinal bacteria on health risks caused by dietary carcinogens.

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