2014
DOI: 10.9790/2402-08626576
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Scenario of Genotoxicity in Fishes and Its Impact on Fish Industry

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
1
3
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Individual differences in the frequencies of NEA, CEA and SEA in the population suggested the need for reviewing their use as genotoxicity bioindicators to confirm or refute the view that NEA are not good indicators for genotoxicity evaluation (Mir et al, 2014) and that the mechanisms of formation of these NEA are not yet fully understood (Cavas & Ergene-Gözükara, 2003). This is also suggested by the results of our study and by the findings of the…”
Section: Con Clus Ionssupporting
confidence: 50%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Individual differences in the frequencies of NEA, CEA and SEA in the population suggested the need for reviewing their use as genotoxicity bioindicators to confirm or refute the view that NEA are not good indicators for genotoxicity evaluation (Mir et al, 2014) and that the mechanisms of formation of these NEA are not yet fully understood (Cavas & Ergene-Gözükara, 2003). This is also suggested by the results of our study and by the findings of the…”
Section: Con Clus Ionssupporting
confidence: 50%
“…(2009) regarding the interspecific variations in the baseline MNc and NEA frequencies. Individual differences in the frequencies of NEA, CEA and SEA in the population suggested the need for reviewing their use as genotoxicity bioindicators to confirm or refute the view that NEA are not good indicators for genotoxicity evaluation (Mir et al., 2014) and that the mechanisms of formation of these NEA are not yet fully understood (Cavas & Ergene‐Gözükara, 2003). This is also suggested by the results of our study and by the findings of the authors quoted above: if genotoxicity in aquatic systems is to be examined using fish erythrocytes as in situ aquatic pollution biomarkers, caution must be exerted, taking into account the pathological anatomy results with differential diagnostic exclusion parasitological, viral and other infectious agents.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fishes have a greater ability to metabolize xenobiotics, accumulate pollutants, and are capable of inhabiting practically all zones of the aquatic habitat. In addition, unlike mammals, fish erythrocytes are nucleated and have been shown to be more sensitive to the induction of DNA damages (Mir et al, 2014). These characteristics make them an excellent model for assessing the potential danger of chemicals introduced into the aquatic environment.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Antioxidant activity obtained is negative, this shows no antioxidant activity in the liver of tilapia, rather it shows antagonistic activity against pyrogalol, or no inhibition process occurs at the end of aquaculture [18]. Oxidative stress due to ambient temperature can cause an increase in free radicals which results in the erosion of antioxidants in the body [19].…”
Section: Superoxide Dismutase Levelsmentioning
confidence: 99%