Assessment of the mutagenicity of the technical product of N-(1-ethylpropyl)-2,6-dinitro -3,4-xy

封面

如何引用文章

全文:

详细

Introduction. Evaluation of genotoxicity of the pesticide technical products is one of the mandatory requirements for their toxicological and hygienic assessment. The data about mutagenic property is ambiguous for some pesticides. This may be due to the use of various active ingredients of technical products of the pesticide for testing, as they may have different profiles of relevant impurities, some of which may be potentially genotoxic.

Material and methods. A technical product of N-(1-ethylpropyl)-2,6-dinitro-3,4-xylidine was tested using the bacterial reverse mutation method with Salmonella typhimurium (Ames test) and the in vivo mammalian micronucleus analysis in mouse bone marrow erythrocytes.

Results. Statistically significant dose-dependent mutagenic effects of the technical product of N-(1-ethylpropyl)-2,6-dinitro-3,4-xylidine were revealed for TA97 (+S9 / -S9); TA100 (+S9 / -S9); TA102 (+S9 / -S9) and TA98 (+S9 / -S9) strains. In all cases, the fold increase of the revertant numbers mediated by the tested substance compared with the concurrent negative control was > 2 except TA98 in the presence of S9. In the micronucleus test, the technical product did not induce a statistically significant increase in the frequency of the micronucleated polychromatophilic erythrocytes in CD-1 mouse bone marrow up to 2000 mg/kg bw.

Conclusion. The data suggest all technical products of pesticides entering the market should be tested for the potential genotoxicity. In such a case it is necessary to use at least two methods on different test systems for obtaining reliable results.

作者简介

O. Egorova

F.F. Erisman Federal Scientific Center of Hygiene of the Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing

编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: noemail@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4748-8771
俄罗斯联邦

Nataliya Ilyushina

F.F. Erisman Federal Scientific Center of Hygiene of the Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing

Email: Ilyushina-na@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9122-9465

PhD., Head of Genetic Toxicology Department of Hygiene, Toxicology of Pesticides and Chemical Safety F.F. Erisman Federal Scientific Center of Hygiene of the Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing, Mytishchi, 141014, Russian Federation.

e-mail: Ilyushina-na@mail.ru

俄罗斯联邦

N. Averianova

F.F. Erisman Federal Scientific Center of Hygiene of the Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing

Email: noemail@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2973-8776
俄罗斯联邦

G. Masaltsev

F.F. Erisman Federal Scientific Center of Hygiene of the Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing

Email: noemail@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1539-1633
俄罗斯联邦

O. Dmitricheva

F.F. Erisman Federal Scientific Center of Hygiene of the Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing

Email: noemail@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7177-579X
俄罗斯联邦

参考

  1. The Federal law N 109-FZ of July 19, 1997 “On the safe handling of pesticides and agrochemicals”. (in Russian)
  2. The Order of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation N 357 of July 10, 2007 “On Approval of the Procedure for State Registration of Pesticides and Agrochemicals”. (in Russian)
  3. The decision of the Board of the Eurasian Economic Commission N 149 of November 10, 2015 “On Amendments to the Customs Union Commission Decision N 299” 28 May 2010». (in Russian)
  4. Methodological instructive regulations MI-1.2.3365-16 from 04.07.2016 “Assessment of mutagenic activity of pesticides”. Moscow: Federal Center for Hygiene and Epidemiology of Rospotrebnadzor; 2016. 49 p. (in Russian)
  5. Parry J.M. Assessing the potential mutagenicity of pesticides. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2005; 31 Suppl 1: 123–8. Available at: http://www.sjweh.fi/show_abstract.php?abstract_id=908
  6. Booth E.D., Rawlinson P.J., Maria Fagundes P., Leiner K.A. Regulatory requirements for genotoxicity assessment of plant protection product active ingredients, impurities, and metabolites. Environ Mol Mutagen. 2017; 58: 325–44. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.1002/em.22084
  7. Dearfield K.L., Gollapudi B.B., Bemis J.C., Benz R.D., Douglas G.R., Elespuru R.K. et al. Next generation testing strategy for assessment of genomic damage: A conceptual framework and considerations. Environ Mol Mutagen. 2017; 58 (5): 264–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/em.22045
  8. Turkez H., Arslan M.E., Ozdemir O. Genotoxicity testing: progress and prospects for the next decade. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2017; 13 (10): 1089–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17425255.2017.1375097
  9. Kirkland D., Kasper P., Martus H.J., Müller L., van Benthem J., Madia F. et al. Updated recommended lists of genotoxic and non-genotoxic chemicals for assessment of the performance of new or improved genotoxicity tests. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 2016; 795: 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2015.10.006
  10. Watanabe T., Hanasaki Y., Hirayama T., Fukui S. Mutagenicity of nitro- and amino-substituted phenazines in Salmonella typhimurium. Mutat Res. 1989; 225 (3): 75–82.
  11. Ambrus A., Hamilton D.J., Kuiper H.A., Racke K.D. Significance of impurities in the safety evaluation of crop protection products (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure Appl Chem. 2003; 75 (7): 937–73. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6612/f32b011da238a771309fbaa6e7965f503583.pdf
  12. Benomyl (AGP:CP/324). FAO specifications for plant protection products; 1995. http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/thematic-sitemap/theme/pests/lpe/lpe-b/en/
  13. Fishbein L. Overview of potential mutagenic problems posed by some pesticides and their trace impurities. Environ Health Perspect. 1978; 27: 125–31. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.7827125
  14. Nitrosamines and Pesticides: A Special Report on the Occurrence of Nitrosamines as Terminal Residues Resulting From Agricultural Use of Certain Pesticides. Pure Appl Chem. 1980; 52 (2): 499–526. https://doi.org/10.1351/pac198052020499
  15. Bontoyan W.R., Law M.W., Wright Jr D.P. Nitrosamines in agricultural and home-use pesticides. J Agric Food Chem. 1979; 27 (3): 631–5. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf60223a009
  16. Ilyushina N., Egorova O., Masaltsev G., Averianova N. Genotoxicity studies of technical products of benzoylcyclohexane-1,3-dione derivative pesticide. Gigiena i sanitariya [Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal]. 2018; 97 (6): 509–13. https://doi.org/10.18821/0016-9900-2018-97-6-509-513 (in Russian)
  17. Ilyushina N., Averianova N., Masaltsev G., Revazova YU. Comparative investigation of genotoxic activity of glyphosate technical products in the micronucleus test in vivo. Toksikologicheskiy vestnik. 2018; 151 (4): 24–8. (in Russian)
  18. European commission directorate-general for health and food safety. Final Renewal report for the active substance PENDIMETHALIN finalised in the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed at its meeting on 18 May 2017 in view of the renewal of the approval of PENDIMETHALIN as active substance in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009SANTE/11656/2016.
  19. California environmental protection agency. Summary of toxicology data. Pendimethalin. T15092.
  20. Health Effects Division EPA USA. Pendimethalin registration eligibility decision document. Review. 1997. 53 p.
  21. The Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR). Pesticide residues in food 2016. FAO plant production and protection paper 229.
  22. Rue J.C., Kim K.-R. Evaluation of genetic toxicity of synthetic chemicals (VII) – a synthetic selective herbicide pendimethalin. J Environ Toxicol. 2013; 18 (2): 121–9.
  23. The State Catalogue of Pesticides and Agrochemicals Permitted for Application on the Territory of the Russian Federation, the date of reference 22.11.2018. (in Russian)
  24. Vighi M., Matthies M., Solomon K.R. Critical assessment of pendimethalin in terms of persistence, bioaccumulation, toxicity, and potential for long-range transport. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2017; 20 (1): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2016.1222320
  25. Hamel A., Roy M., Proudlock R. The bacterial reverse mutation test. Chapter 4. In: Proudlock R., ed. Genetic Toxicology Testing. A Laboratory Manual. 2016: 79–138. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/book/9780128007648
  26. Mortelmans K., Zeiger E. The Ames Salmonella/microsome mutagenicity assay. Mutat Res. 2000; 455: 29–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0027-5107(00)00064-6
  27. OECD, test 471:1997, IDT. Bacterial reverse mutation test.
  28. Maron D.M., Ames B.N. Revised methods for the Salmonella mutagenicity test. Mutat Res. 1983; 113: 173–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1161(83)90010-9
  29. Methodological instructive regulation «Methods for the primary detection of genetic activity of environmental pollutants using bacterial test systems». Moscow: Interdepartmental Scientific and Technical Council on Complex Problems of Environmental Protection and Rational Use of Natural Resources under the State Committee for Science and Technology; 1985. 33 p. (in Russian)
  30. Guidelines on short-term methods for detection of mutagenic and cancerogenic chemicals. A Co-Publishing of United Nations Environment Programme, International Labour Organization and World Health Organization. Moscow: Meditsina; 1989: 26–38. (in Russian)
  31. Abilev S.K. Identification and prediction of mutagenic activity of chemical compounds of the environment. Autoabstract of Diss. Moscow; 2003. 50 р. http://abilev.narod.ru/publications.htm (in Russian)
  32. Guidelines on Assessment of the toxicity and hazards of chemicals and their mixtures for human health (Р 1.2.3156-13). Moscow: Federal Center for Hygiene and Epidemiology of Rospotrebnadzor; 2014. 639 p. (in Russian)
  33. OECD Test No. 474: Mammalian Erythrocyte Micronucleus Test; 2014.
  34. Guidelines. Assessment of mutagenic activity of environmental factors in cells of different mammalian organs using the micronucleus method. Moscow: Interdepartmental Scientific Council on Human Ecology and Environmental Hygiene of the Russian Federation; 2001. 22 p (in Russian)
  35. Kirkland D.J. Statistical evaluation of mutagenicity test data: recommendations of the UK Environmental Mutagen Society. Environ Health Perspect. 1994; 102 (Suppl 1): 43–7.
  36. McCullagh P., Nelder J.A. Generalized linear models. CRC Monographs on Statistics & Applied Probability 37. Second Edition. London, New York: Chapman and Hall; 1983. 261 p. https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.4710290217
  37. McDonald J.H. Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test for repeated tests of independence. Handbook of Biological Statistics (3rd ed.). Sparky House Publishing: Baltimore, Maryland; 2014: 94–100. http://www.biostathandbook.com/cmh.html
  38. Atwood D., Paisley-Jones C. Pesticides Industry Sales and Usage 2008 – 2012 Market Estimates. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC 2046; 2017.
  39. Ahmad I., Ahmad M. Fresh water fish, Channa punctatus, as a model for pendimethalin genotoxicity testing: A new approach toward aquatic environmental contaminants. Environ Toxicol. 2016; 31 (11): 1520–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/tox.22156
  40. Aboulila А.А., Belal E.B., Metwaly M.M., El-Ramady H.R. Degenotoxicity of Pendimethalin Contaminated Clay Soil by Pseudomonas resinovorans Using Anatomical, Cytogenetic and Biochemical Analysis in Vicia faba Plants. International. Int J Curr Res Biosci Plant Biol. 2016; 3 (2): 38–53. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20546/ijcrbp.2016.302.005
  41. Dimitrov B.D., Gadeva P.G., Benova D.K., Bineva M.V. Comparative genotoxicity of the herbicides Roundup, Stomp and Reglone in plant and mammalian test systems. Mutagenesis. 2006; 21 (6): 375–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/mutage/gel044
  42. Ahmad I., Ahmad A., Ahmad M. Binding properties of pendimethalin herbicide to DNA: multispectroscopic and molecular docking approaches. Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2016; 18 (9): 6476–85. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5cp07351k
  43. Hou L., Lee W.J., Rusiecki J., Hoppin J.A., Blair A., Bonner M.R. et al. Pendimethalin Exposure and Cancer Incidence Among Pesticide Applicators. Epidemiology. 2006; 17 (3): 302–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ede.0000201398.82658.50
  44. Bonner M.R., Freeman L., Hoppin J.A., Koutros S., Sandler D.P., Lynch C.F. et al. Occupational Exposure to Pesticides and the Incidence of Lung Cancer in the Agricultural Health Study. Environ Health Perspect. 2017; 125 (4): 544–51. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP456

补充文件

附件文件
动作
1. JATS XML
下载

版权所有 © Egorova O.V., Ilyushina N.A., Averianova N.S., Masaltsev G.V., Dmitricheva O.O., 2024


СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77 - 37884 от 02.10.2009.