Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Language
Publication year range
1.
Environ Toxicol Chem ; 2024 Apr 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38629594

ABSTRACT

We evaluated the main leaching indices that have been used for decades for the protection of groundwater against contamination by pesticides. We describe the index classifications in detail and discuss their advantages and limitations relative to their prediction value. Most of the indices have similarities in the types of parameters they use. Some of the similarities are basic physicochemical properties of the pesticides such as their water solubility and their organic carbon partition coefficient, as well as characteristics such as environmental persistence in the soil and some soil characteristics. It is very difficult to maintain a simple index with high predictive power. However, comparisons are allowed by many indices among different active ingredients before pesticides are classified according to the risk of being groundwater contaminants. In contrast, limitations are the scarce inclusion of pesticide byproducts in the ground, lack of prediction capacity for polar pesticides, and lack of prediction of the vulnerability of groundwater to being contaminated by pesticides. Despite the limitations of such approaches, they are of great utility, particularly for protection of groundwater from pesticide contamination when little information is available, which is the case in most developing countries and in countries with economies in transition. Caution is recommended in the analysis of information generated by these approximations, which ideally should be validated experimentally in the different application scenarios and the needs for pesticide assessment based on local information. Environ Toxicol Chem 2024;00:1-14. © 2024 SETAC.

2.
Biol Res ; 48: 56, 2015 Oct 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26453052

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis, pro-inflammatory and invasive benign disease estrogen dependent, abnormally express in endometria the enzyme P450Arom, positively regulated by steroid factor-1 (SF-1). Our objective was to study the nuclear protein contents of upstream stimulating factor 2 (USF2a and USF2b), a positive regulator of SF-1, throughout the menstrual cycle in eutopic endometria from women with and without (control) endometriosis and the involvement of nuclear estrogen receptors (ER) and G-coupled protein estrogen receptor (GPER)-1. RESULTS: Upstream stimulating factor 2 protein contents were higher in mid (USF2b) and late (USF2a and USF2b) secretory phase in eutopic endometria from endometriosis than control (p < 0.05). In isolated control epithelial cells incubated with E2 and PGE2, to resemble the endometriosis condition, the data showed: (a) significant increase of USF2a and USF2b nuclear protein contents when treated with E2, PPT (specific agonist for ERα) or G1 (specific agonist for GPER1); (b) no increase in USF2 binding to SF-1 E-Box/DNA consensus sequence in E2-treated cells; (c) USF2 variants protein contents were not modified by PGE2; (d) SF-1 nuclear protein content was significantly higher than basal when treated with PGE2, E2 or G1, stimulation unaffected by ICI (nuclear ER antagonist); and (e) increased (p < 0.05) cytosolic protein contents of P450Arom when treated with PGE2, E2, PPT or G1 compared to basal, effect that was additive with E2 + PGE2 together. Nevertheless, in endometriosis cells, the high USF2, SF-1 and P450Arom protein contents in basal condition were unmodified. CONCLUSION: These data strongly suggest that USF2 variants and P450Arom are regulated by E2 through ERα and GPER1, whereas SF-1 through GPER1, visualized by the response of the cells obtained from control endometria, being unaffected the endogenously stimulated cells from endometriosis origin. The lack of E2 stimulation on USF2/SF-1 E-Box/DNA-sequence binding and the absence of PGE2 effect on USF2 variants opposite to the strong induction that they exert on SF1 and P450 proteins suggest different mechanisms and indirect regulations. The sustained USF2 variants protein expression during the secretory phase in eutopic endometria from women with endometriosis may participate in the pathophysiology of this disease strongly associated with infertility and its characteristic endometrial invasion to ectopic sites in the pelvic cavity.


Subject(s)
Aromatase/metabolism , Endometriosis/metabolism , Endometrium/metabolism , Estradiol/metabolism , Gene Expression/genetics , Upstream Stimulatory Factors/metabolism , Adult , Biopsy , Endometriosis/pathology , Endometriosis/physiopathology , Endometrium/cytology , Epithelial Cells/metabolism , Female , Humans , Immunoblotting , Menstrual Cycle/metabolism , Primary Cell Culture , Statistics, Nonparametric
3.
Biol. Res ; 48: 1-11, 2015. graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-950820

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis, pro-inflammatory and invasive benign disease estrogen dependent, abnormally express in endometria the enzyme P450Arom, positively regulated by steroid factor-1 (SF-1). Our objective was to study the nuclear protein contents of upstream stimulating factor 2 (USF2a and USF2b), a positive regulator of SF-1, throughout the menstrual cycle in eutopic endometria from women with and without (control) endometriosis and the involvement of nuclear estrogen receptors (ER) and G-coupled protein estrogen receptor (GPER)-1. RESULTS: Upstream stimulating factor 2 protein contents were higher in mid (USF2b) and late (USF2a and USF2b) secretory phase in eutopic endometria from endometriosis than control (p < 0.05). In isolated control epithelial cells incubated with E2 and PGE2, to resemble the endometriosis condition, the data showed: (a) significant increase of USF2a and USF2b nuclear protein contents when treated with E2, PPT (specific agonist for ERa) or G1 (specific agonist for GPER1); (b) no increase in USF2 binding to SF-1 E-Box/DNA consensus sequence in E2-treated cells; (c) USF2 variants protein contents were not modified by PGE2; (d) SF-1 nuclear protein content was significantly higher than basal when treated with PGE2, E2 or G1, stimulation unaffected by ICI (nuclear ER antagonist); and (e) increased (p < 0.05) cytosolic protein contents of P450Arom when treated with PGE2, E2, PPT or G1 compared to basal, effect that was additive with E2 + PGE2 together. Nevertheless, in endometriosis cells, the high USF2, SF-1 and P450Arom protein contents in basal condition were unmodified. CONCLUSION: These data strongly suggest that USF2 variants and P450Arom are regulated by E2 through ERa and GPER1, whereas SF-1 through GPER1, visualized by the response of the cells obtained from control endometria, being unaffected the endogenously stimulated cells from endometriosis origin. The lack of E2 stimulation on USF2/SF-1 E-Box/DNA-sequence binding and the absence of PGE2 effect on USF2 variants opposite to the strong induction that they exert on SF1 and P450 proteins suggest different mechanisms and indirect regulations. The sustained USF2 variants protein expression during the secretory phase in eutopic endometria from women with endometriosis may participate in the pathophysiology of this disease strongly associated with infertility and its characteristic endometrial invasion to ectopic sites in the pelvic cavity.


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Adult , Aromatase/metabolism , Gene Expression/genetics , Endometriosis/metabolism , Endometrium/metabolism , Estradiol/metabolism , Biopsy , Immunoblotting , Statistics, Nonparametric , Endometriosis/physiopathology , Endometriosis/pathology , Endometrium/cytology , Epithelial Cells/metabolism , Primary Cell Culture , Menstrual Cycle/metabolism
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...