4.7 Article

Evaluation of the genotoxic and cytotoxic effects of glyphosate-based herbicides in the ten spotted live-bearer fish Cnesterodon decemmaculatus (Jenyns, 1842)

期刊

ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY
卷 89, 期 -, 页码 166-173

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2012.11.028

关键词

Mortality; Micronucleus; Erythrocyte:erythroblast ratio; Poeciliidae; Panzer (R); Credit (R)

资金

  1. National University of La Plata [11/N619, 11/N699]
  2. National Council for Scientific and Technological Research (CONICET) from Argentina [0106]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mortality, genotoxicity, and cytotoxicity of the 48% glyphosate-based formulations Panzer and Credit (R) were evaluated on Cnesterodon decemmaculatus (Jenyns, 1842) (Pisces, Poeciliidae) under laboratory conditions. Induction of micronuclei (MN) and alterations in the erythrocytes:erythroblasts ratio were employed as end points for genotoxicity and cytotoxicity, respectively. For Panzer (R), mean values of 16.70 and 15.68 mg/L were determined for LC50 at 24 and 96 h, respectively, and these concentrations reached mean values of 98.50 and 91.73 mg/L for Credit (R). LC50 values decreased as a negative linear function of Panzer (R) exposure time within the 0-96 h period, but not for Credit (R). LC50 values indicated that the fish were more sensitive to Panzer (R) than to Credit (R). Both 3.9 and 7.8 mg/L of Panzer (R) increased MN frequency at 48 and 96 h of treatment. When fish were exposed to Credit (R), an increased frequency of MN over control values was found after 96 h for all concentrations assayed, but not after 48 h. No cellular cytotoxicity was found after Panzer (R) and Credit (R) treatment, regardless of both the concentration and the sampling time. Furthermore, our results demonstrated that Panzer (R) and Credit (R) should be considered as glyphosate-based commercial formulations with genotoxic but not cytotoxic effect properties. (C) 2012 Elsevier 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

4.7
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