EFFECTS OF PCB ON XENOBIOTIC BIOTRANSFORMATION ENZYME-ACTIVITIES IN THE LIVER AND 21-HYDROXYLATION IN THE HEAD KIDNEY OF JUVENILE RAINBOW-TROUT

Authors
Citation
S. Blom et L. Forlin, EFFECTS OF PCB ON XENOBIOTIC BIOTRANSFORMATION ENZYME-ACTIVITIES IN THE LIVER AND 21-HYDROXYLATION IN THE HEAD KIDNEY OF JUVENILE RAINBOW-TROUT, Aquatic toxicology, 39(3-4), 1997, pp. 215-230
Citations number
53
Categorie Soggetti
Marine & Freshwater Biology",Toxicology
Journal title
ISSN journal
0166445X
Volume
39
Issue
3-4
Year of publication
1997
Pages
215 - 230
Database
ISI
SICI code
0166-445X(1997)39:3-4<215:EOPOXB>2.0.ZU;2-5
Abstract
We examined the effects of handling induced-stress combined with tetra chlorobiphenyl (TCB) exposure and the effects of long-term exposure to PCB on selected detoxification enzymes in the liver and kidney, and o n the head kidney 21-hydroxylation of a 17-alpha-hydroxyprogesterone, an enzymatic step in cortisol biosynthesis in rainbow trout (Oncorhync hus mykiss). Our findings suggest that experimental conditions, such a s stress, play an important role in mediating detoxification responses in rainbow trout. TCB together with stress caused significantly eleva ted liver etoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) and etoxycoumarine-O-deet hylase (ECOD) activities, whereas 14 days TCB treatment alone did not alter the enzyme activities significantly. The UDP-glucuronosyltransfe rase (UGT) activity increased significantly in fish recovering from st ress. The 21-hydroxylation of a 17-alpha-hydroxyprogesterone was not a ffected by TCB, stress or by PCB. The induced ECOD activity could be i nhibited by alpha NF to control levels, indicating the existence of a non-inducible form of CYP exhibiting ECOD activity. Long-term exposure to PCBs induced UGT, glutathione reductase (GR) and glutathione tansf erase (GT) activities in the liver. The rapid induction of UGT by TCB compared with PCB suggests that TCB is a potent UGT-inducing congener in the PCB mixture. The different induction patterns of CYP-dependent activities and the GR, GT and UGT activities suggest differential regu lation of these enzymatic activities. (C) 1997 Elsevier Science B.V.