Bacterial Reverse Mutation Test for Two Salmonella Typhimurium (TA100, TA98) Strains to Detect Mutant and Carcinogenic Effect of Some Insect Growth Regulators

Alaa Sajjad AlKhafagi; Sarah Kadhim Al-Rahimy

Alaa Sajjad AlKhafagi General Directorate of Education of Holy Kerbala -Iraq- University of Warith Al-Anbiyaa
Sarah Kadhim Al-Rahimy College of Science, University of Kerbala

Keywords: Ames, Carcinogenic, Insect growth regulators, Mutation

Abstract

This study has aimed to investigate the imutant influence of three insect growth regulators (IGRs): Neporex and Apploud, which belong to chitin synthesis inhibitors (CSIs), and Admiral, which belong to juvenile hormone analog JHAs. In Iraq , Kerbala Governorate of December 2022 . These IGRs are used to insect control by using biological methods including the study of reversal mutation for two strains of Salmonella typhimurium (TA100, TA98) in two ways: The plate incorporation method and the fluctuation method. The results showed that the CSIs (Neporax, Applaud) have mutant influence in bacteria cells for all used concentrations( which are prepared after determining the minimal inhibition concentration for each growth regulator). The plate incorporation method, It has been noticed that the numbers of reversal colonies in each strain increased with increasing concentrations compared with spontaneous reversal colonies in negative control. In using the fluctuation methods, It has been noticed increasing the turbid hole numbers which shows the material effect on bacteria mutation. The result referred to the positive relationship between concentration and the number of holes when testing Admiral (JHIs) by plate incorporation and fluctuation methods, the result has shown there is no mutant effect on Salmonella typhimurium. The statistical analysis has shown there are no significant differences between the numbers of reversal colonies and unclear holes as a result of different concentration treatments of JHIs with negative control of both strains (TA100, TA98)under testing.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Mulla MS (1995). The future of insect growth regulators in vectors control .J.AM. Mosq.cont.Vol.Assoc.11(2): 269-273.
2. Gada MA,Arefa SA,Abdelhamid AA, Elwassimyb MM , Abdel-Raheem ShAA (2021). Biologically and active organic compounds as insect growth regulators (IGRs): introduction , mode of action , and some synthetic methods.Current Chemistry Letters 10 (4):393-412 OOI:10.5267/j.ccl.2021.5.004
3. Kornuta N,Bagleg E , Nedopitanskaya N (1996). .Genotoxic effect of pesticides .Jon. Environ .pathol.Toxicol.oncol., 15 (2-4):75-78.
4. Chandi AK , Kaur A (2022). Hormone Analogues and Chitin Synthesis Inhibitors.. Molecular Approaches for Sustainable Insect Pest Management, Chapter 253-282 pp
5. Batazing BL (2002).Microbiology ,First edition ,Book ,cole activision of Thomson Learning, INC.USA., pp:156.
6. Lucero LS ,pastor S, suarez R, Durban C,Gomez T,parron A, Creus R (2000).Cytogeneic biomonitoring of Spanish greenhouse workers exposed to pesticides micronuclei analyasis in peripheral blood lymphocytes and buccal epithelial cells. Mutant .Res., 464: 255-262.
7. Dulout FN, Pasori MC, Olivero OA,Gonzalez CM,Loria D, Matos F, sobel U, De bujan EC, Abinano N (1985).sister-chromatide exchange and chromosomal aberrations in population exposed to pesticide .mutation res. 143: 237-244.
8. Bolognesi C, Bonatti S, Degan P, Gallerani E, peluso M, Rabboni R, Roggieri P , Abbond A., andolo (1997). Genotoxic activity of glyphosphate and its technical formulation roundup> Jou.Agric.Food chm.,45:1957-1962.
9. Rawi DH , Bakhoum SF (2022).Chromosomal instability as a source of genomic plasticity.Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, 74,101913. https://doi.org/10.1016/jde.2022.101913
10. Wilhelm T , Said M , Naim V (2020).DNA replication stress and chromosomal instability: dangerous liaisons. Genes (Basel),11(6):642. https://doi:10.3390/qenes11060642
11. Gatehouse D (1978) .Detection of mutagenic derivatives of cyclophosphamide and a variety of other mutagens in a "microtitre" fluctuation test, without microsomal activation. Mutation research 53(3):289-96.
12. OECD (1997). Guideline .no.417. OECD. organization for Economic and Development Guidelines for the testing of chemical; section 4- health effect bacterial reverse mutation test ,OECD, pairs.
13. Ames B, McCann J , Yamasaki E (1975) Methods for Detecting Carcinogens and Mutagens with the Salmonella/Mammalian-Microsome Mutagenicity Test. Mutation Research, 31, 347-364.
14. Liddel D (1976). Practical tests 2*2contingency tables statistician., 25: 295
15. Jumagaziyev AB, Iskakbayeva ZA, Myrzabayeva AN, Suldina NA, Paretskaya NA, Datkhayev UM, Flisyuk EV, Ilin AI (2020). Evaluation of mutagenic properties of 2(C6H15N2O2) +2I3-H2O iodine coordination complex in bacterial reverse mutation test.Acta Poloniae Pharmaceutica- Drug Research, 77(3):465-473.
16. Wang W, Duan H, Pei Z, Xu R, Qin Z , Zhu G, Sun L (2018). Evaluation by the Ames assay of the mutagenicity of UV filters using Benzophenone and Benzophenone- International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Healt15(9):1907; doi:10.3390/ijerph15091907.
17. Brinqezu F, Simon S (2022). Salmonella typhmurium TA100 and TA1535 and E. coli WP2 uvrA are highly sensitive to detect the mutagenicity of short Alkyl-N-Nitrosamines in the bacterial reverse mutation test.National Center for Biotechnology