Role of oxidative stress and antioxidant defense in 3,3 ',4,4 ',5-pentachlorobiphenyl-induced toxicity and species-differential sensitivity in chicken and duck embryos
Xl. Jin et al., Role of oxidative stress and antioxidant defense in 3,3 ',4,4 ',5-pentachlorobiphenyl-induced toxicity and species-differential sensitivity in chicken and duck embryos, TOX APPL PH, 172(3), 2001, pp. 241-248
The role of oxidative stress and antioxidant defense in 3,3',4,4',5-pentach
lorobiphenyl (PCB 126)-induced toxicity and species-specific sensitivity wa
s examined in White Leghorn chicken (Gallus domesticus) and Pekin duck (Ana
s platyrhynchos) embryos. Eggs were injected into the air cell with 0.4-1.6
mug PCB 126/kg egg in corn oil prior to incubation, Lipid peroxidation mea
sured by thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), the GSSG:GSH rati
o, and glutathione peroxidase (GPox) activities were determined in liver an
d adipose tissue of day 19 chicken and day 26 duck embryos. In chicken embr
yos, PCB 126 increased mortality and the incidence of edema and liver lesio
ns, decreased embryo size, increased eye and head malformations, and marked
ly reduced fat storage. In contrast, no effects on the endpoints were obser
ved in duck embryos even at the highest dose used in chicken embryos. PCB 1
26 increased hepatic 7-ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) activity in a do
se-dependent manner in chicken but not duck embryos. PCB 126 significantly
increased TEARS levels in liver and to a greater degree in adipose tissue o
f chicken embryos, indicating that adipose tissue is a sensitive target for
this compound. Increases in lipid peroxidation by PCB 126 were associated
with significant decreases in GPox activity in these tissues. These biochem
ical changes support oxidative stress playing a role in PCB 126-induced emb
ryo toxicity while antioxidant defenses provided protection against oxidati
ve damage induced by this compound. Ducks, the less-sensitive species, show
ed higher basal levels of hepatic GPox than chickens, suggesting that this
antioxidant enzyme may contribute to the differences in sensitivity to this
compound between the two species. (C) 2001 Academic Press.