Comparative assessment of the SOS Chromotest kit and the Mutatox test with the Salmonella plate incorporation (Ames test) and fluctuation tests for screening genotoxic agents

R. Legault, C. Blaise, D. Rokosh, R. Chong-Kit
{"title":"Comparative assessment of the SOS Chromotest kit and the Mutatox test with the Salmonella plate incorporation (Ames test) and fluctuation tests for screening genotoxic agents","authors":"R. Legault, C. Blaise, D. Rokosh, R. Chong-Kit","doi":"10.1002/TOX.2530090107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Genuine needs for rapid, simple, and cost-efficient biotesting procedures to screen an ever-increasing number of chemicals and environmental samples are making the search for such assays a constant endeavor. With respect to genotoxicity screening, we compared, in this study, the performance of two novel assays (Vibrio fischeri M169 Mutatox™ assay and the Escherichia coli PQ37 SOS Chromotest kit assay) with two well-established Ames testing procedures (plate incorporation and fluctuation assays). Testing material included 14 chemicals (10 potentially directly acting and 4 indirectly acting compounds) reflecting different chemical classes (2 inorganics, 2 pesticides, 2 halogenated hydrocarbons, 2 alkylating agents, 2 aromatic amines, 1 chlorophenol, and 3 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons). Comparative assessment criteria included (1) interprocedural agreement in detecting presence or absence of genotoxicity, (2) accuracy in being able to recognize animal (non)carcinogens, and (3) sensitivity (detection of lowest actively genotoxic concentration). In terms of qualitative responses, both the SOS Chromotest (86% agreement) and Mutatox assays (93% agreement) were good predictors of the Ames testing mutagenicity. For their capability to correctly discriminate between (non)carcinogens, accuracy was 82% (9 of 11 chemicals) for Mutatox, 73% (8 of 11 chemicals) for Ames testing, and 64% (7 of 11 chemicals) for the SOS Chromotest. In general, the Salmonella-based assays proved more sensitive (6 times out of 9 chemicals) than the Mutatox (3 times out of 9 chemicals) and the SOS Chromotest (never more sensitive). Overall, this study demonstrates reliable performances by both the SOS Chromotest and Mutatox for chemical genotoxicity screening when results are referenced to the well-validated Ames assay. Although additional comparative data with other chemicals will be required, it appears likely that these more practical and cost-efficient procedures can be presently useful to screen genotoxic activity of various xenobiotics and environmental samples. © 1994 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc..","PeriodicalId":11824,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Toxicology & Water Quality","volume":"34 1","pages":"45-57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"67","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Toxicology & Water Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/TOX.2530090107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 67

Abstract

Genuine needs for rapid, simple, and cost-efficient biotesting procedures to screen an ever-increasing number of chemicals and environmental samples are making the search for such assays a constant endeavor. With respect to genotoxicity screening, we compared, in this study, the performance of two novel assays (Vibrio fischeri M169 Mutatox™ assay and the Escherichia coli PQ37 SOS Chromotest kit assay) with two well-established Ames testing procedures (plate incorporation and fluctuation assays). Testing material included 14 chemicals (10 potentially directly acting and 4 indirectly acting compounds) reflecting different chemical classes (2 inorganics, 2 pesticides, 2 halogenated hydrocarbons, 2 alkylating agents, 2 aromatic amines, 1 chlorophenol, and 3 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons). Comparative assessment criteria included (1) interprocedural agreement in detecting presence or absence of genotoxicity, (2) accuracy in being able to recognize animal (non)carcinogens, and (3) sensitivity (detection of lowest actively genotoxic concentration). In terms of qualitative responses, both the SOS Chromotest (86% agreement) and Mutatox assays (93% agreement) were good predictors of the Ames testing mutagenicity. For their capability to correctly discriminate between (non)carcinogens, accuracy was 82% (9 of 11 chemicals) for Mutatox, 73% (8 of 11 chemicals) for Ames testing, and 64% (7 of 11 chemicals) for the SOS Chromotest. In general, the Salmonella-based assays proved more sensitive (6 times out of 9 chemicals) than the Mutatox (3 times out of 9 chemicals) and the SOS Chromotest (never more sensitive). Overall, this study demonstrates reliable performances by both the SOS Chromotest and Mutatox for chemical genotoxicity screening when results are referenced to the well-validated Ames assay. Although additional comparative data with other chemicals will be required, it appears likely that these more practical and cost-efficient procedures can be presently useful to screen genotoxic activity of various xenobiotics and environmental samples. © 1994 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
SOS显色试验试剂盒与沙门氏菌平板掺入(Ames试验)和波动试验对基因毒性筛选的比较评价
对快速、简单和经济有效的生物检测程序的真正需求,以筛选越来越多的化学品和环境样品,这使得寻找这种检测方法成为一项持续的努力。在遗传毒性筛选方面,我们在本研究中比较了两种新型检测方法(费氏弧菌M169 Mutatox™检测和大肠杆菌PQ37 SOS显色试剂盒检测)与两种成熟的Ames检测方法(平板掺入法和波动法)的性能。测试材料包括14种化学物质(10种可能直接作用的化合物和4种间接作用的化合物),反映了不同的化学类别(2种无机物、2种农药、2种卤化烃、2种烷基化剂、2种芳香胺、1种氯苯酚和3种多环芳烃)。比较评估标准包括(1)检测是否存在遗传毒性的程序间一致性,(2)能够识别动物(非)致癌物质的准确性,以及(3)灵敏度(检测最低活性遗传毒性浓度)。在定性反应方面,SOS显色试验(86%的一致性)和Mutatox试验(93%的一致性)都是Ames测试致突变性的良好预测指标。对于正确区分(非)致癌物的能力,Mutatox检测的准确率为82%(11种化学物质中的9种),Ames检测的准确率为73%(11种化学物质中的8种),SOS Chromotest检测的准确率为64%(11种化学物质中的7种)。一般来说,以沙门氏菌为基础的检测被证明比Mutatox(9种化学物质中的3倍)和SOS Chromotest(从来没有更敏感)更敏感(9种化学物质中的6倍)。总的来说,本研究证明了SOS显色试验和Mutatox在化学遗传毒性筛选中的可靠性能,当结果与经过充分验证的Ames试验相参考时。虽然还需要与其他化学品进行更多的比较数据,但这些更实际和成本效益更高的程序目前可能有助于筛选各种外源性药物和环境样品的基因毒性活性。©1994 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信