4.4 Article

Protective effects of β-glucan against oxidative injury induced by 2.45-GHz electromagnetic radiation in the skin tissue of rats

期刊

ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 304, 期 7, 页码 521-527

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-012-1205-9

关键词

Electromagnetic radiation; beta-Glucan; Oxidative stress; Skin; Wireless devices

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent times, there is widespread use of 2.45-GHz irradiation-emitting devices in industrial, medical, military and domestic application. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of 2.45-GHz electromagnetic radiation (EMR) on the oxidant and antioxidant status of skin and to examine the possible protective effects of beta-glucans against the oxidative injury. Thirty-two male Wistar albino rats were randomly divided into four equal groups: control; sham exposed; EMR; and EMR + beta-glucan. A 2.45-GHz EMR emitted device from the experimental exposure was applied to the EMR group and EMR + beta-glucan group for 60 min daily, respectively, for 4 weeks. beta-glucan was administered via gavage at a dose of 50 mg/kg/day before each exposure to radiation in the treatment group. The activities of antioxidant enzymes, superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) and catalase (CAT), as well as the concentration of malondialdehyde (MDA) were measured in tissue homogenates of the skin. Exposure to 2.45-GHz EMR caused a significant increase in MDA levels and CAT activity, while the activities of SOD and GSH-Px decreased in skin tissues. Systemic beta-glucan significantly reversed the elevation of MDA levels and the reduction of SOD activities. beta-glucan treatment also slightly enhanced the activity of CAT and prevented the depletion of GSH-Px activity caused by EMR, but not statistically significantly. The present study demonstrated the role of oxidative mechanisms in EMR-induced skin tissue damages and that beta-glucan could ameliorate oxidative skin injury via its antioxidant properties.

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

4.4
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