Comparison of the Ames II and traditional Ames test responses with respect to mutagenicity, strain specificities, need for metabolism and correlation with rodent carcinogenicity

Abstract

The Ames II Salmonella mutagenicity assay procedure was used to test 71 chemicals, and the results were compared with those from the traditional Ames Salmonella test using the NTP database as the reference. All Ames II tests were performed using a fluctuation procedure in microplate format, using TAMix for the detection of base pair substitutions and TA98 to detect frameshift mutations. There was 84% agreement between the two procedures in identifying mutagens and non-mutagens, which is equivalent to the intra- and interlaboratory reproducibility of 87% for the traditional test. The two tests also performed similarly in their predictions of rodent carcinogenicity.

The Ames II and Ames MPF Penta I Assay: A Liquid Microplate Format Modification of the Classic Ames Test

“…The disagreement in the test results was obtained mostly with compounds that specifi cally revert E. coli or TA1535. In a study released in 2009 [ 9 ], 71 compounds tested with the Ames II assay were compared with published data for the traditional test, resulting in an agreement of 84 %, which is comparable to the intra-and interlaboratory reproducibility of 87 % for the traditional test itself.…”

Investigation of Antioxidants’s Antimutagenic Effects by The Ames Test

“…Sıvı mikroplak versiyonu ile agara uygulama yapılan geleneksel Ames testinin uyumluluğu yapılan birçok çalışma ile gösterilmiştir (11,13,14,18,19).…”

Models for Detection of Genotoxicity in vivo: Present and Future

“…The Ames Fluctuation Test is a variation of the Ames Test that is performed in liquid culture, using a chromophore as a binary indicator of growth (26). This assay has been adapted to a microtiter format (Ames II Test) (27). This format can incorporate microsomes, S9 fraction, or hepatocytes for bioactivation.…”