Cargando…
Bacterial genotoxicity bioreporters
Ever since the introduction of the Salmonella typhimurium mammalian microsome mutagenicity assay (the ‘Ames test’) over three decades ago, there has been a constant development of additional genotoxicity assays based upon the use of genetically engineered microorganisms. Such assays rely either on r...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3815808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21255340 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-7915.2009.00160.x |
_version_ | 1782289446003015680 |
---|---|
author | Biran, Alva Yagur‐Kroll, Sharon Pedahzur, Rami Buchinger, Sebastian Reifferscheid, Georg Ben‐Yoav, Hadar Shacham‐Diamand, Yosi Belkin, Shimshon |
author_facet | Biran, Alva Yagur‐Kroll, Sharon Pedahzur, Rami Buchinger, Sebastian Reifferscheid, Georg Ben‐Yoav, Hadar Shacham‐Diamand, Yosi Belkin, Shimshon |
author_sort | Biran, Alva |
collection | PubMed |
description | Ever since the introduction of the Salmonella typhimurium mammalian microsome mutagenicity assay (the ‘Ames test’) over three decades ago, there has been a constant development of additional genotoxicity assays based upon the use of genetically engineered microorganisms. Such assays rely either on reversion principles similar to those of the Ames test, or on promoter–reporter fusions that generate a quantifiable dose‐dependent signal in the presence of potential DNA damaging compounds and the induction of repair mechanisms; the latter group is the subject of the present review. Some of these assays were only briefly described in the scientific literature, whereas others have been developed all the way to commercial products. Out of these, only one, the umu‐test, has been fully validated and ISO‐ and OECD standardized. Here we review the main directions undertaken in the construction and testing of bacterial‐based genotoxicity bioassays, including the attempts to incorporate at least a partial metabolic activation capacity into the molecular design. We list the genetic modifications introduced into the tester strains, compare the performance of the different assays, and briefly describe the first attempts to incorporate such bacterial reporters into actual genotoxicity testing devices. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3815808 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-38158082014-02-12 Bacterial genotoxicity bioreporters Biran, Alva Yagur‐Kroll, Sharon Pedahzur, Rami Buchinger, Sebastian Reifferscheid, Georg Ben‐Yoav, Hadar Shacham‐Diamand, Yosi Belkin, Shimshon Microb Biotechnol Minireviews Ever since the introduction of the Salmonella typhimurium mammalian microsome mutagenicity assay (the ‘Ames test’) over three decades ago, there has been a constant development of additional genotoxicity assays based upon the use of genetically engineered microorganisms. Such assays rely either on reversion principles similar to those of the Ames test, or on promoter–reporter fusions that generate a quantifiable dose‐dependent signal in the presence of potential DNA damaging compounds and the induction of repair mechanisms; the latter group is the subject of the present review. Some of these assays were only briefly described in the scientific literature, whereas others have been developed all the way to commercial products. Out of these, only one, the umu‐test, has been fully validated and ISO‐ and OECD standardized. Here we review the main directions undertaken in the construction and testing of bacterial‐based genotoxicity bioassays, including the attempts to incorporate at least a partial metabolic activation capacity into the molecular design. We list the genetic modifications introduced into the tester strains, compare the performance of the different assays, and briefly describe the first attempts to incorporate such bacterial reporters into actual genotoxicity testing devices. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2010-07 2010-06-24 /pmc/articles/PMC3815808/ /pubmed/21255340 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-7915.2009.00160.x Text en Copyright © 2009 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2009 Society for Applied Microbiology and Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
spellingShingle | Minireviews Biran, Alva Yagur‐Kroll, Sharon Pedahzur, Rami Buchinger, Sebastian Reifferscheid, Georg Ben‐Yoav, Hadar Shacham‐Diamand, Yosi Belkin, Shimshon Bacterial genotoxicity bioreporters |
title | Bacterial genotoxicity bioreporters |
title_full | Bacterial genotoxicity bioreporters |
title_fullStr | Bacterial genotoxicity bioreporters |
title_full_unstemmed | Bacterial genotoxicity bioreporters |
title_short | Bacterial genotoxicity bioreporters |
title_sort | bacterial genotoxicity bioreporters |
topic | Minireviews |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3815808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21255340 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-7915.2009.00160.x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT biranalva bacterialgenotoxicitybioreporters AT yagurkrollsharon bacterialgenotoxicitybioreporters AT pedahzurrami bacterialgenotoxicitybioreporters AT buchingersebastian bacterialgenotoxicitybioreporters AT reifferscheidgeorg bacterialgenotoxicitybioreporters AT benyoavhadar bacterialgenotoxicitybioreporters AT shachamdiamandyosi bacterialgenotoxicitybioreporters AT belkinshimshon bacterialgenotoxicitybioreporters |