BackgroundLower urinary tract infections are common in dogs, and Escherichia coli is the most common bacterial pathogen isolated. The literature has conflicting evidence regarding the inhibitory effects of urine concentration and pH on E. coli growth.Hypothesis/ObjectivesTo determine the effect of different pH and urine concentrations on E. coli growth in vitro.AnimalsVoided urine samples from 10 apparently healthy spayed female dogs were used.MethodsA matrix of 9 urine specific gravity (USG; 1.010, 1.020, and 1.030) and pH (5.5, 7.0, and 8.5) combinations was prepared by diluting and titrating filtered voided urine samples. Three E. coli isolates were obtained from urine of female dogs with signs of lower urinary tract infection and cultured at different urine pH and USG combinations in wells of a microtiter plate. The number of E. coli colony‐forming units (CFU) per mL of urine was calculated after aerobic incubation of the urine at 37°C for 18 hours, and statistically compared.ResultsSignificant differences were identified in the mean log CFU/mL among different combinations of pH and USG. The lowest log CFU/mL were observed in alkaline concentrated urine (pH 8.5 and USG 1.030).Conclusions and Clinical Importance Escherichia coli in vitro growth was higher in neutral to acidic and diluted urine compared to alkaline and concentrated urine. The impact of non‐alkalizing diluting diets on the incidence of E. coli lower urinary tract infections should be further explored.

No abstract

No abstract

Considering the promising previous results of ct‐[RuCl(CO)(dppb)(bipy)]PF6 (where dppb = 1,4‐bis(diphenylphosphino)butane and bipy = 2,2′‐bipyridine) as an antitumor agent, novel biological assays evaluating its toxicogenic potential were performed. The genotoxicity of the compound was evaluated by the in vitro micronucleus test (V79, Chinese hamster lung fibroblasts; HepG2, hepatocellular carcinoma cells), in vivo bone marrow micronucleus test and comet assay in hepatocytes (Swiss mice). The animals were treated with 0.63, 1.25, 2.5 and 5.0 mg/kg body weight (bw) of the compound. Negative (water) and positive (cisplatin, 1.5 mg/kg bw; methyl methanesulfonate, 40 mg/kg bw) controls were included. The parameters considered in the comet assay were the percentage of tail DNA, tail moment and tail length. The results of the in vitro micronucleus tests showed the absence of genotoxicity in V79 cells, while the compound was genotoxic in HepG2 cells at a concentration of 1.25 μm. In the in vivo micronucleus test, the compound was not genotoxic at the different doses evaluated. In the comet assay, only the dose of 5.0 mg/kg bw resulted in a significant increase in the frequency of DNA damage in hepatocytes when compared to the negative control. The genotoxic effect observed in HepG2 cells and in the liver comet assay indicates that the compound was metabolized by hepatic cells.

2-AA, 2-anthramine; 2-AF, 2-aminofluorene; AFB, aflatoxin B; B[a]P, benzo[a]pyrene; BOD, biological oxygen demand; BPDE, benzo[a]pyrene-7,8-diol-9,10-epoxide; CA, (-)-copalic acid; CMO, oleoresin of Copaifera multijuga, DMEM, Dulbecco`s Modified Eagles`s Medium; DMSO, dimethylsulfoxide; EMBRAPA, Brazilian agricultural research corporation; GC-MS, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry; HAM-F10, nutrient mixture F-10 Ham; HPLC, high performance liquid chromatography; LC-MS, liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry; MI, mutagenic index; MMC, mitomycin C; MMS, methyl methanesulfonate; MN, micronucleus; MNPCE, micronucleated polychromatic erythrocyte; NCE, normochromatic erythrocyte; NDI, nuclear division index; NMR, nuclear magnetic resonance; NPD, 4-nitro-o-phenylenediamine; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline; PCE, polychromatic erythrocyte; SA, sodium azide; V79, Chinese hamster lung fibroblast.