Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Freeman, G. B.
Right arrow Articles by Mayes, B. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Freeman, G. B.
Right arrow Articles by Mayes, B. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Toxicological Sciences 53, 377-391 (2000)
Copyright © 2000 by the Society of Toxicology

An Assessment of Neurotoxicity of Aroclors 1016, 1242, 1254, and 1260 Administered in Diet to Sprague-Dawley Rats for One Year

G. B. Freeman*,1, R. A. Lordo*, A. W. Singer*, A. C. Peters*, B. H. Neal{dagger}, E. E. McConnell{ddagger} and B. A. Mayes§

* Battelle, Columbus, Ohio, 43201; {dagger} JSC, Inc., Arlington, Virginia; {ddagger} ToxPath, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina; and § General Electric Company, Environmental Research Center, Schenectady, New York 12301

As part of a comparative chronic toxicity/oncogenicity study of different Aroclors (1016, 1242, 1254, and 1260), neurotoxicity was assessed in male and female Sprague-Dawley rats using functional observational battery (FOB) and motor activity tests, and histopathologic evaluation of selected nervous system tissues. Doses varied by Aroclor and ranged from 25 to 200 ppm in the diet. Animals were evaluated prior to initiation of dosing and at 13, 26, 39, and 52 weeks of exposure. Clinical signs, body weights, and feed consumption were evaluated weekly. Data analysis of FOB and motor activity results revealed several instances where Aroclor-treated groups were different from control. However, these were considered incidental, as they lacked any consistent dose- or time-related pattern that would suggest Aroclor-induced neurotoxicity. The nonremarkable findings during each of the four assessments were supported by the absence of any treatment-related clinical signs or mortality. Decreased body weight gain was evident in the male 100 ppm Aroclor 1254 dose group and in all female Aroclor 1254 dose groups late in the study (when a linear relationship was assumed between body weight and time), correlating with decreased feed consumption. Although a variety of incidental, spontaneous, degenerative changes were found in nervous tissue evaluated histopathologically, these changes were seen with similar incidence and severity in treated and control groups. No lesions were found that could be attributed to Aroclor-related neurotoxicity. In summary, 52 weeks of exposure to Aroclors 1016, 1242, 1254, or 1260 mixed in the diet did not yield any functional or morphologic changes indicative of PCB-induced neurotoxicity.

Key Words: Aroclor; chronic toxicity; oncogenicity; rats; PCBs; neurotoxicity.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
P. J. Bushnell, V. C. Moser, R. C. MacPhail, W. M. Oshiro, E. C. Derr-Yellin, P. M. Phillips, and P. R. S. Kodavanti
Neurobehavioral Assessments of Rats Perinatally Exposed to a Commercial Mixture of Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Toxicol. Sci., July 1, 2002; 68(1): 109 - 120.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol Ind HealthHome page
O. Faroon, D. Jones, and C. De Rosa
Effects of polychlorinated biphenyls on the nervous system
Toxicology and Industrial Health, August 1, 2000; 16(7-8): 305 - 333.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.