Persistent DNA Damage Measured by Comet Assay of Sprague Dawley Rat Lung Cells after Five Days of Inhalation Exposure and 1 Month Post-Exposure to Dispersed Multi-Wall Carbon Nanotubes (MWCNTs) Generated by New MWCNT Aerosol Generation System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) have specific physico-chemical properties that are useful for the electronics, automotive, and construction industries. Yet, despite their many advantages, there is a current lack of available information on the human health and environmental hazards of CNTs. For this reason, the current study investigated the inhalation toxicity potential of multiwall CNTs (MWCNTs). Eight-week-old rats were divided into four groups (10 rats in each group), the fresh-air control (0mg/m(3)), low-concentration group (0.16mg/m(3)), middle-concentration group (0.34mg/m(3)), and high-concentration group (0.94mg/m(3)), and the whole body was exposed to MWCNTs for 5 days (6h/day). Lung cells were then isolated from five rats in each group on day 0 and 1 month after the 5-day exposure, respectively. The MWCNTs were generated by a newly designed generation system, and the MWCNT concentrations in the exposure chambers monitored in accordance with National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 0500 using a membrane filter. The MWCNTs were also sampled for an elemental carbon concentration analysis using a glass filter. The animals exhibited no significant body weight changes, abnormal clinical signs, or mortality during the experiment. A single-cell gel electrophoresis assay (Comet assay) was conducted to determine the DNA damage in lung cells obtained from the right lung. As a result, the Olive tail moments were 23.00±1.76, 30.39±1.96, 22.96±1.26, and 33.98±2.21 for the control, low-, middle-, and high-concentration groups, respectively, on day 0 postexposure. Meanwhile, 1 month postexposure, the Olive tail moments were 25.00±2.71, 28.39±3.55, 22.56±1.36, and 31.97±3.16 for the control, low-, middle-, and high-concentration groups, respectively. Thus, the MWCNTs caused a statistically significant increase in lung DNA damage at high concentration (0.94mg/m(3)) when compared with the negative control group on day 0 and 1 month postexposure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".