Factors affecting the in vitro micronucleus assay for evaluation of nanomaterials

34Citations
Citations of this article
49Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

A number of in vitro methodologies have been used to assess the genotoxicity of different nanomaterials, including titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs) and silver nanoparticles (AgNPs). The in vitro micronucleus assay is one of the most commonly used test methods for genotoxicity evaluation of nanomaterials. However, due to the novel features of nanomaterials, such as high adsorption capacity and fluorescence properties, there are unexpected interactions with experimental components and detection systems. In this study, we evaluate the interference by two nanoparticles, AgNPs andTiO2 NPs, with the in vitro micronucleus assay system and possible confounding factors affecting cytotoxicity and genotoxicity assessment of the nanomaterials including cell lines with different p53 status, nanoparticle coatings and fluorescence, cytochalasin B, fetal bovine serum in cell treatment medium and different measurement methodologies for detecting micronuclei. Our results showed that micronucleus induction by AgNPs was similar when evaluated using flow cytometry or microscope, whereas the induction by TiO2 NPs was different using the two methods due toTiO2’s fluorescence interference with the cytometry equipment. Cells with the mutated p53 gene were more sensitive to micronucleus induction by AgNPs than the p53 wild-type cells. The presence of serum during treatment increased the toxicity of AgNPs. The coatings of nanoparticles played an important role in the genotoxicity of AgNPs. These collective data highlight the importance of considering the unique properties of nanoparticles in assessing their genotoxicity using the in vitro micronucleus assay.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Li, Y., Doak, S. H., Yan, J., Chen, D. H., Zhou, M., Mittelstaedt, R. A., … Chen, T. (2017). Factors affecting the in vitro micronucleus assay for evaluation of nanomaterials. Mutagenesis, 32(1), 151–159. https://doi.org/10.1093/MUTAGE/GEW040

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free