4.7 Article

Additive toxicity of Co-exposure to pristine multi-walled carbon nanotubes and benzo α pyrene in lung cells

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
Volume 183, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109219

Keywords

Co-exposure; Additive toxicity; Multi walled-carbon nanotubes; Benzo a pyrene; Metal impurities

Funding

  1. School of Public Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Mixture exposure to pristine multi-walled carbon nanotubes (P-MWCNTs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) such as benzo a pyrene (BaP) in the environment is inevitable. Assessment toxicity of P-MWCNTs and BaP individually may not provide sufficient toxicological information. The objective of this work is to investigate the combined toxicity of P-MWCNTs and BaP in human epithelial lung cells (A549). The physicochemical properties of P-MWCNTs were determined suing analytical instruments. The toxicity of P-MWCNTs and BaP on A549 lung cells individually or combined were assessed. For toxicity assessment, cell viability, ROS generation, oxidative DNA damage, and apoptosis experiments were conducted. The results of this study demonstrated that P-MWCNTs and BaP individually reduced cell viability in A549 lung cells, and oxidative stress was as the possible mechanism of cytotoxicity. The co-exposure to P-MWCNTs and BaP enhanced the cytotoxicity compared to exposure to P-MWCNTs and BaP individually, but not statistically significant. The two-factorial analysis demonstrated an additive toxicity interaction for co-exposure to P-MWCNTs and BaP. The complicated toxicity interaction among BaP with fibers and metal impurities of P-MWCNTS could be probable reasons for additive toxicity interaction. Results of this study could be helpful as the basis for future studies and risk assessment of co-exposure to MWCNTs and PAHs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available