28.02.2013 Views

Handbook of Solvents - George Wypych - ChemTech - Ventech!

Handbook of Solvents - George Wypych - ChemTech - Ventech!

Handbook of Solvents - George Wypych - ChemTech - Ventech!

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

1096 James L. Botsford<br />

In Europe many tests with animal and human cells have been developed (Clemendson<br />

et al., 1996). These tests are effective, provide values comparable to those obtained with animals.<br />

But they require that the animal cells be grown in culture. This requires a sophisticated<br />

laboratory and well trained personnel. Again the tests take several days. Some tests<br />

take up to a week. Damage to the cells is determined in a variety <strong>of</strong> ways. The ability <strong>of</strong> cells<br />

to reduce the thiazole tetrazolium dye, MTT, is noted; the activity <strong>of</strong> an enzyme, <strong>of</strong>ten lactic<br />

dehydrogenase, is determined; the ability <strong>of</strong> the cell to take up some dyes or to retain other<br />

dyes is observed. Often morphological changes are noted to determine if the cells are damaged.<br />

These techniques can be quite complicated and require well trained personnel and a<br />

sophisticated, well equipped, laboratory.<br />

There are several reports using animal cells to test the MEIC chemicals (Shrivastava et<br />

al., 1992; Rommert et al., 1994; Rouget et al., 1993). Shrivastava et al., used freshly isolated<br />

rat hepatocyte cells and two transformed cell lines. Comparable results were obtained with<br />

the three cell types indicating that rat hepatocytes are no more resistant to toxic chemicals<br />

than are other cells. They determined viability <strong>of</strong> the cells with 1) morphological studies; 2)<br />

lactic dehydrogenase activity in the hepatocytes; 3) the ability <strong>of</strong> the cells to take up the dye<br />

tryptan blue. They got much the same results with the three techniques. Rommert et al., simply<br />

determined the effect <strong>of</strong> the toxins on the ability <strong>of</strong> the cells to replicate. They determined<br />

cell numbers with a Coulter Counter after 48 hours. Rouget et al., followed the effect<br />

<strong>of</strong> the toxins by determining the ability <strong>of</strong> cells to reduce the tetrazolium dye MTT and the<br />

ability <strong>of</strong> cells to take up the dye neutral red. The authors maintained that the two methods<br />

provided comparable results.<br />

In Europe tests with rotifers, cysts from aquatic invertebrates (Calleja et al., 1994), development<br />

<strong>of</strong> onion roots have been tried but none have been accepted (Persoone et al.,<br />

1994; Snell and Persoone, 1989; Fresjog, 1985; Gaggi et al. 1995). Jaffe (1995) has proposed<br />

a method using the survival <strong>of</strong> a protozoan. Toxic chemicals kill the protozoa. The<br />

test requires a Coulter particle counter to determine the numbers <strong>of</strong> viable protozoa.<br />

Tests using bacteria as the indicator organism are on the market. Microtox TM uses a<br />

bioluminescent marine bacterium (Bullich et al., 1990). The bacteria, when growing in high<br />

numbers, emit light. Toxic chemicals inhibit the production <strong>of</strong> light. The test requires a<br />

luminometer to measure light production and a refrigerated water bath to grow the cells at<br />

15 o C. The results are difficult to interpret. The ability <strong>of</strong> the cells to emit light gradually decreases<br />

and a control to follow production <strong>of</strong> light in the absence <strong>of</strong> a toxin must be run. And<br />

the value for this enters into the calculations. Typically the calculations require at least a<br />

half hour to carry out (Ribo and Kaiser, 1987). A sophisticated computer program is used to<br />

analyze the results. The initial cost <strong>of</strong> the kit is significant, but it is inexpensive to use once<br />

this cost is absorbed (Elanabarwy et al., 1988). The test appears to be challenge for an MS<br />

level graduate student at our university. It is not certain why toxic chemicals inhibit light<br />

production but it is assumed that the chemicals damage the cytoplasmic membrane and reduce<br />

electron transport to the pigments responsible for light production. This method is very<br />

popular as a “first test”, to see if a chemical need be investigated further. The test has been<br />

used to determine the toxicity <strong>of</strong> more than a thousand chemicals (Kaiser and Palabrica,<br />

1991). There is a European version <strong>of</strong> the same text, Biotox TM (Kahru and Borchardt, 1994).<br />

Thomulka et al. (1995) have proposed a variation on this test.<br />

Polytox TM uses a consortium <strong>of</strong> bacteria from sewage sludge. Toxic chemicals inhibit<br />

the oxidation <strong>of</strong> a carbon source (presumably glucose). Presumably the toxic chemicals<br />

damage the cellular membrane and the associated cytochromes involved in electron transport.<br />

Oxidation <strong>of</strong> the substrate is followed with a respirometer or with oxygen electrodes.<br />

Both these methods are complicated and expensive to set up and to maintain. Again, at our<br />

university, this technique appears to be appropriate for MS level graduate students. This test

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!