4.6 Article

Amelioration of Cd-induced bioaccumulation, hematological parameters, and heat shock protein-related genes by Vitamin C on common carp

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpc.2022.109362

关键词

Bioaccumulation; Common carp; Vitamin C; Hematological parameters; Heat shock protein

资金

  1. Innovation and Entrepreneurship project for college students in Jilin province [S202110202017]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that Vitamin C has a significant protective effect against the toxicity of cadmium, by inhibiting bioaccumulation levels, improving hematological parameters, and regulating the expression of heat shock protein-related genes.
The heavy metal cadmium (Cd) is a kind of non-essential toxic environmental pollutant with extremely long biological half-life, various toxic and sublethal effects on aquatic organisms, and many adverse effects on the organs of human and other mammals. Vitamin C is an essential micronutrient in aquatic feed, and an indispensable nutrient for maintaining physiological processes in different animals, including fish. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of administration of Vitamin C on bioaccumulation, hematological parameters and heat shock protein-related genes of common carp following Cd exposure. The fish were exposed to waterborne Cd at 0, 1 and 2 mg/L and administration Vitamin C at 150 and 300 mg/kg for 8 weeks. The results obtained indicate that Vitamin C can provide a significant protective effect on the toxicity of cadmium by inhibiting alterations in the levels of bioaccumulation, hematological parameters (including calcium, magnesium, glucose, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), glutamic-pyruvic transaminase (ALT), aspartate transaminase (AST), total protein, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), cholesterol and lysozyme (LZM)) and heat shock protein-related genes (Hsp70, Hsp90, Hsp47 and Hsp60). Our study demonstrates that vitamin C has the potential to reduce heavy metal damage to common carp and improve immunity.

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