1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Toxic effects of substituted p-benzoquinones and hydroquinones in in vitro bioassays are altered by reactions with the cell assay medium

      , , , , , ,
      Water Research
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references76

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Occurrence, genotoxicity, and carcinogenicity of regulated and emerging disinfection by-products in drinking water: a review and roadmap for research.

          Disinfection by-products (DBPs) are formed when disinfectants (chlorine, ozone, chlorine dioxide, or chloramines) react with naturally occurring organic matter, anthropogenic contaminants, bromide, and iodide during the production of drinking water. Here we review 30 years of research on the occurrence, genotoxicity, and carcinogenicity of 85 DBPs, 11 of which are currently regulated by the U.S., and 74 of which are considered emerging DBPs due to their moderate occurrence levels and/or toxicological properties. These 74 include halonitromethanes, iodo-acids and other unregulated halo-acids, iodo-trihalomethanes (THMs), and other unregulated halomethanes, halofuranones (MX [3-chloro-4-(dichloromethyl)-5-hydroxy-2(5H)-furanone] and brominated MX DBPs), haloamides, haloacetonitriles, tribromopyrrole, aldehydes, and N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) and other nitrosamines. Alternative disinfection practices result in drinking water from which extracted organic material is less mutagenic than extracts of chlorinated water. However, the levels of many emerging DBPs are increased by alternative disinfectants (primarily ozone or chloramines) compared to chlorination, and many emerging DBPs are more genotoxic than some of the regulated DBPs. Our analysis identified three categories of DBPs of particular interest. Category 1 contains eight DBPs with some or all of the toxicologic characteristics of human carcinogens: four regulated (bromodichloromethane, dichloroacetic acid, dibromoacetic acid, and bromate) and four unregulated DBPs (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, MX, and NDMA). Categories 2 and 3 contain 43 emerging DBPs that are present at moderate levels (sub- to low-mug/L): category 2 contains 29 of these that are genotoxic (including chloral hydrate and chloroacetaldehyde, which are also a rodent carcinogens); category 3 contains the remaining 14 for which little or no toxicological data are available. In general, the brominated DBPs are both more genotoxic and carcinogenic than are chlorinated compounds, and iodinated DBPs were the most genotoxic of all but have not been tested for carcinogenicity. There were toxicological data gaps for even some of the 11 regulated DBPs, as well as for most of the 74 emerging DBPs. A systematic assessment of DBPs for genotoxicity has been performed for approximately 60 DBPs for DNA damage in mammalian cells and 16 for mutagenicity in Salmonella. A recent epidemiologic study found that much of the risk for bladder cancer associated with drinking water was associated with three factors: THM levels, showering/bathing/swimming (i.e., dermal/inhalation exposure), and genotype (having the GSTT1-1 gene). This finding, along with mechanistic studies, highlights the emerging importance of dermal/inhalation exposure to the THMs, or possibly other DBPs, and the role of genotype for risk for drinking-water-associated bladder cancer. More than 50% of the total organic halogen (TOX) formed by chlorination and more than 50% of the assimilable organic carbon (AOC) formed by ozonation has not been identified chemically. The potential interactions among the 600 identified DBPs in the complex mixture of drinking water to which we are exposed by various routes is not reflected in any of the toxicology studies of individual DBPs. The categories of DBPs described here, the identified data gaps, and the emerging role of dermal/inhalation exposure provide guidance for drinking water and public health research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Reactions of chlorine with inorganic and organic compounds during water treatment-Kinetics and mechanisms: a critical review.

            Numerous inorganic and organic micropollutants can undergo reactions with chlorine. However, for certain compounds, the expected chlorine reactivity is low and only small modifications in the parent compound's structure are expected under typical water treatment conditions. To better understand/predict chlorine reactions with micropollutants, the kinetic and mechanistic information on chlorine reactivity available in literature was critically reviewed. For most micropollutants, HOCl is the major reactive chlorine species during chlorination processes. In the case of inorganic compounds, a fast reaction of ammonia, halides (Br(-) and I(-)), SO(3)(2-), CN(-), NO(2)(-), As(III) and Fe(II) with HOCl is reported (10(3)-10(9)M(-1)s(-1)) whereas low chlorine reaction rates with Mn(II) were shown in homogeneous systems. Chlorine reactivity usually results from an initial electrophilic attack of HOCl on inorganic compounds. In the case of organic compounds, second-order rate constants for chlorination vary over 10 orders of magnitude (i.e. <0.1-10(9)M(-1)s(-1)). Oxidation, addition and electrophilic substitution reactions with organic compounds are possible pathways. However, from a kinetic point of view, usually only electrophilic attack is significant. Chlorine reactivity limited to particular sites (mainly amines, reduced sulfur moieties or activated aromatic systems) is commonly observed during chlorination processes and small modifications in the parent compound's structure are expected for the primary attack. Linear structure-activity relationships can be used to make predictions/estimates of the reactivity of functional groups based on structural analogy. Furthermore, comparison of chlorine to ozone reactivity towards aromatic compounds (electrophilic attack) shows a good correlation, with chlorine rate constants being about four orders of magnitude smaller than those for ozone.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Modulation of Nrf2-mediated antioxidant and detoxifying enzyme induction by the green tea polyphenol EGCG.

              Frequent consumption of green tea, one of the most popular and widely consumed beverages, has been known to protect against development of various cancers according to numerous experimental and several population-based studies. Molecular mechanisms underlying chemopreventive effects exerted by green tea and its components have been extensively investigated. (-)-Epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG), a major green tea polyphenol, has been shown to induce expression of glutathione S-transferase, glutathione peroxidase, glutamate cysteine ligase, hemeoxygenase-1, etc. that are involved in the elimination or inactivation of reactive oxygen species and electrophiles implicated in multi-stage carcinogenesis. The redox-sensitive transcription factor, nuclear factor erythroid 2 p45 (NF-E2)-related factor (Nrf2) plays a key role in regulating induction of phase II detoxifying or antioxidant enzymes. Thus, activation of Nrf2 is considered to be an important molecular target of many chemopreventive and chemoprotective agents. This review summarizes the molecular basis of chemoprevention and cytoprotection afforded by EGCG with emphasis on its ability to modulate Nrf2-mediated cellular events.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Water Research
                Water Research
                Elsevier BV
                00431354
                September 2021
                September 2021
                : 202
                : 117415
                Article
                10.1016/j.watres.2021.117415
                34348209
                b0a94ae5-12e1-4c4e-ae4f-04b4c992f729
                © 2021

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article