4.5 Article

Evaluation of hepatic subcellular fractions for Alamar blue and MTT reductase activity

期刊

TOXICOLOGY IN VITRO
卷 15, 期 3, 页码 257-259

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0887-2333(01)00014-5

关键词

Alamar blue; MTT; enzymatic reduction; cell viability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Alamar blue and MTT are indicators used to measure cytotoxicity of various chemicals in cultured cells. Both Alamar blue and MTT are reduced by mitochondrial enzymes. We observed enhanced fluorescence of Alamar blue when kidney epithelial cells were co-incubated with hepatic post-mitochondrial supernatant (S9) fractions as compared with cells incubated in the absence of S9 fractions. The present studies were carried out to determine whether hepatic cytosolic and/or microsomal enzymes were capable of metabolizing Alamar blue and/or MTT to their reduced products. Livers from female Sprague-Dawley rats were used to prepare S9 fraction, and mitochondrial, microsomal and cytosolic fractions. Fractions containing 1 or 5 mg protein/ml were incubated with Alamar blue or MTT for up to 4 h. Fluorescence (Alamar blue) or absorbance (MTT) were determined and expressed as differences between treated wells and controls. Hepatic fractions (S9, mitochondria, microsomes and cytosol) caused concentration- and time-dependent increases in Alamar blue fluorescence and MTT absorbance. Reduction of Alamar blue and MTT by hepatic S9 fraction was abolished by heating. Reduction of Alamar blue by hepatic mitochondria was approximately equivalent to that catalyzed by hepatic S9 fraction or cytosol. Reduction of MTT by hepatic mitochondria was approximately equivalent to that catalyzed by hepatic S9 fraction or microsomes. These data indicate that mitochondrial, cytosolic and microsomal enzymes reduce Alamar blue and MTT. Therefore, caution should be exercised in ascribing decreases in viability as due solely to mitochondrial damage when using either of these dyes. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. 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

4.5
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