↓ Skip to main content

Chrysotile and rock wool fibers induce chromosome aberrations and DNA damage in V79 lung fibroblast cells

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science and Pollution Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
Chrysotile and rock wool fibers induce chromosome aberrations and DNA damage in V79 lung fibroblast cells
Published in
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11356-017-9403-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yan Cui, Ji Ma, Wei Ye, Zhixia Han, Faqin Dong, Jianjun Deng, Qingbi Zhang

Abstract

According to global estimates, at least 107,000 people die each year from asbestos-related lung cancer, mesothelioma, and asbestosis resulting from occupational exposure. Chrysotile accounts for approximately 90% of asbestos used worldwide. Artificial substitutes can also be cytotoxic to the same degree as chrysotile. But only a few researchers focused on their genetic effects and mutagenicity information which is useful in evaluating the carcinogenicity of chemicals. In this study, chrysotile from Mangnai, Qinghai, China, and an artificial substitute, rock wool fiber were prepared as suspensions and were tested at concentrations of 50, 100, and 200 μg/ml in V79 lung fibroblasts. Chromosome aberrations were detected by micronucleus assay after exposure for 24 h, and DNA damage were estimated by single cell gel electrophoresis after exposure for 12, 24, or 48 h. According to the results, chrysotile and rock wool fibers caused micronuclei to form in a dose-dependent manner in V79 cells; olive tail moment values increased in a dose- and time-dependent manner. When V79 cells were exposed to a concentration of 200 μg/ml, the degree of DNA damage induced by chrysotile fibers was greater than rock wool fibers. Our study suggests that both chrysotile and rock wool fibers could induce chromosome aberrations and DNA damage. These materials are worthy of further study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 1 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 11%
Researcher 1 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 11%
Student > Postgraduate 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 11%
Environmental Science 1 11%
Social Sciences 1 11%
Unknown 6 67%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 September 2018.
All research outputs
#13,855,711
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#2,589
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,765
of 315,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#57
of 223 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,843 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 223 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.