Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Phthalates and alternative plasticizers differentially affect phenotypic parameters in gonadal somatic and germ cell lines
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Phthalates and alternative plasticizers differentially affect phenotypic parameters in gonadal somatic and germ cell lines
Do you wish to request the book?
Phthalates and alternative plasticizers differentially affect phenotypic parameters in gonadal somatic and germ cell lines
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Phthalates and alternative plasticizers differentially affect phenotypic parameters in gonadal somatic and germ cell lines
2022
Overview
The developmental and reproductive toxicity associated with exposure to phthalates has motivated a search for alternatives. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the adverse effects of some of these chemicals. We used high-content imaging to compare the effects of mono (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (MEHP) with six alternative plasticizers: di-2-ethylhexyl terephthalate (DEHTP); diisononyl-phthalate (DINP); diisononylcyclohexane-1,2-dicarboxylate (DINCH); 2-ethylhexyl adipate (DEHA); 2,2,4-trimethyl 1,3-pentanediol diisobutyrate (TXIB) and di-isodecyl-adipate (DIDA). A male germ spermatogonial cell line (C18–4), a Sertoli cell line (TM4) and two steroidogenic cell lines (MA-10 Leydig and KGN granulosa) were exposed for 48 h to each chemical (0.001–100 µM). Cell images were analyzed to assess cytotoxicity and effects on phenotypic endpoints. Only MEHP (100 µM) was cytotoxic and only in C18–4 cells. However, several plasticizers had distinct phenotypic effects in all four cell lines. DINP increased Calcein intensity in C18–4 cells, whereas DIDA induced oxidative stress. In TM4 cells, MEHP, and DINCH affected lipid droplet numbers, while DEHTP and DINCH increased oxidative stress. In MA-10 cells, MEHP increased lipid droplet areas and oxidative stress; DINP decreased the number of lysosomes, while DINP, DEHA, and DIDA altered mitochondrial activity. In KGN cells, MEHP, DINP and DINCH increased the number of lipid droplets, whereas DINP decreased the number of lysosomes, increased oxidative stress and affected mitochondria. The Toxicological Priority Index (ToxPi) provided a visual illustration of the cell line specificity of the effects on phenotypic parameters. The lowest administered equivalent doses were observed for MEHP. We propose that this approach may assist in screening alternative plasticizers. Summary Sentence WhileMEHP was the only chemical displaying cytotoxicity, alternative plasticizers caused cell type-specific phenotypic changes in somatic and germ cell lines. Graphical Abstract
Publisher
Society for the Study of Reproduction,Oxford University Press
Subject
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.