Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res B. 2018 Jul 13;438:119–123. doi: 10.1016/j.nimb.2018.07.004

Naphthalene DNA Adduct Formation and Tolerance in the Lung

Bruce A Buchholz 1, Sarah A Carratt 2, Edward A Kuhn 3, Nicole M Collette 3, Xinxin Ding 4, Laura S Van Winkle 2
PMCID: PMC6322674  NIHMSID: NIHMS1500109  PMID: 30631217

Abstract

Naphthalene (NA) is a respiratory toxicant and possible human carcinogen. NA is a ubiquitous combustion product and significant component of jet fuel. The National Toxicology Program found that NA forms tumors in two species, in rats (nose) and mice (lung). However, it has been argued that NA does not pose a cancer risk to humans because NA is bioactivated by cytochrome P450 monooxygenase enzymes that have very high efficiency in the lung tissue of rodents but low efficiency in the lung tissue of humans. It is thought that NA carcinogenesis in rodents is related to repeated cycles of lung epithelial injury and repair, an indirect mechanism. Repeated in vivo exposure to NA leads to development of tolerance, with the emergence of cells more resistant to NA insult. We tested the hypothesis that tolerance involves reduced susceptibility to the formation of NA-DNA adducts. NA-DNA adduct formation in tolerant mice was examined in individual, metabolically-active mouse airways exposed ex vivo to 250 μΜ 14C-NA. Ex vivo dosing was used since it had been done previously and the act of creating a radioactive aerosol of a potential carcinogen posed too many safety and regulatory obstacles. Following extensive rinsing to remove unbound 14C-NA, DNA was extracted and 14C-NA-DNA adducts were quantified by AMS. The tolerant mice appeared to have slightly lower NA-DNA adduct levels than non-tolerant controls, but intra-group variations were large and the difference was statistically insignificant. It appears the tolerance may be more related to other mechanisms, such as NA-protein interactions in the airway, than DNA-adduct formation.

Keywords: naphthalene, DNA adducts, carcinogen, tolerance test

Introduction

Naphthalene (NA) is a common volatile combustion product found throughout the environment. It is the smallest poly-aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) and is found both outdoors and indoors [14]. Common sources of NA to the general population include vehicle emissions, biomass burning, cigarette smoke, mothballs, and house-hold block deodorizers [5]. NA is also widely used as a precursor or building block of other chemicals in industrial applications. It is used in the manufacture of plasticizers, dyes, resins, tanning agents and pesticides, can be used as a surfactant, and constitutes 1–3% of JP8 jet fuel [5]. NA metabolites have been found in the urine of most adults and children tested, regardless of occupation or locale [4,611]. NA is an established animal carcinogen producing elevations in bronchiolar alveolar carcinomas in female mice and dose dependent increases in neuroblastomas in the nasal epithelium of rats [1216].

Chemicals that form stable DNA adducts in target tissues are generally considered carcinogens. These compounds are treated as though high dose can be linearly extrapolated to zero without a threshold for natural clearance of the adducted region. This approach of extrapolating high dose to environmental exposure probably over-estimates risk [1719]. In this study, we used the sensitivity of AMS to measure adducts of 14C-NA at environmentally relevant doses, the lung tissue concentration of NA from an aerosol NA exposure of 10 ppm, the occupational limit for NA exposure set by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

The goal of the study was to determine if mice made tolerant to naphthalene would have fewer DNA adducts than naive animals. Tolerance is the resistance to further insult in susceptible cells after exposure to a repeated insult. Previous studies have demonstrated that the mechanism of NA tolerance and NA acute injury is the same regardless of route of exposure [2023]. We expect that the glutathione adaptive response to NA exposure, with subsequent glutathione-mediated detoxification in these animals will result in them being less susceptible to formation of DNA adducts.

AMS has long been used to assess natural and anthropogenic contributions to particulate matter (PM) mass collected on filters [2427]. In traditional source apportionment studies there are often no attempts to separate chemicals such as PAHs in PM. The studies are used to attribute anthropogenic fossil or biogenic sources of PM. More recently, specific large non-volatile PAHs commonly found in PM have been labeled with 14C to ascertain bioavailabililty of ingested PAHs, metabolism, and elimination [28,29].

Conducting an exposure study with a radiolabeled aerosol is a challenging safety design and engineering problem. When the test compound is a potential carcinogen, it is nearly impossible to satisfy safety concerns within the budget limitations of a typical toxicology study, even when using low levels of radioactivity enabled by AMS measurement. Creating, controlling, and confirming control of an aerosol is difficult. Ex vivo dosing of fresh, metabolically active tissue is an alternative dosing procedure that mitigates safety and containment issues of an intentional aerosol. The concentration of NA used in culture (250 μM) for ex vivo exposure was comparable to the tissue NA concentration in airway cells when live mice were exposed to 10 ppm NA aerosol for 1 h [30]. The ex vivo exposure in culture produced a similar concentration of NA in the tissue by liquid diffusion as was produced by aerosol exposure [30].

Materials and Methods

Radiochemicals.

14C-NA (≥ 98% pure) was diluted to a specific activity of 0.39 mCi/mmol (25 mM) with non-radiolabeled NA (Sigma, cat# 84679) in acetonitrile from a stock solution of 14C-NA (1,4,5,8-14C; ≥ 98% pure) in methanol (MC 2147; 500 μCi, 58 mCi/mmol; Moravek Biochemicals, Brea, CA).

Mouse Tissue.

Adult female NIH Swiss mice were purchased from ENVIGO. Mice were kept in a barrier facility with filtered air in Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC) approved conditions on a 12h light/dark cycle with food and water ad libitum (always available). All animal experiments were performed under protocols approved by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory or University of California Davis Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) in accordance with National Institutes of Health guidelines. Each dosed group contained six mice.

Mice were made tolerant using 7 daily intraperitoneal injections of unlabeled NA at 200 mg/kg given in ~200 μL of corn oil (20 mg NA/mL corn oil). A tolerance control group received intraperitoneal injections of corn oil only on the same schedule. On day 8 mice were euthanized with an overdose of Fatal-Plus® C IIN (Vortech Pharmaceuticals, pentobarbital sodium). Lungs were removed as described [3134] and airways were microdissected to isolate the metabolically active part of the lung for ex vivo exposure to 14C-NA [33,34]. Each mouse lung was split in half with one side serving as the 14C-NA exposure group and the other side serving as undosed control. Figure 1 shows an example of a microdissected mouse airway.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Microdissected mouse airway.

Tissue incubation.

Freshly dissected, metabolically active tissue was placed in a 20-ml scintillation vial with 990 μL of media and kept on ice until the start of the exposure. Radiolabeled 14C-NA (10 μL of 25 mM NA) was added to each vial to yield final concentration of 250 μM NA. Vials were sealed and incubated in a water bath for 1 hour at 37°C. The water bath was kept in a fume hood and the vials were agitated by hand for ~10 s every 5 min during exposure. Parallel incubations were conducted with tissue in 990 μL media with 10 μL acetonitrile, and used as an indicator of undosed background level of 14C. At the end of the exposure, all vials were cooled and promptly transferred to screw-top microfuge tubes. Tissue was washed 20–25 times with 1 mL of 100% ethanol (EtOH). The microfuge tubes were changed every 3 rinses to remove the tissue from residual unbound NA. Washes were checked using a liquid scintillation counter (PerkinElmer Liquid Scintillation Analyzer, Tri-Carb 2910R, Waltham, MA) and considered clean when the rinse ethanol exhibited background levels of 14C as from 1 mL of fresh EtOH. At the completion of rinsing, all liquid was removed and each tissue sample was placed in new screw top microcentrifuge tube and stored frozen.

DNA isolation and quantification.

Frozen tissue was placed in 2-mL FastPrep Lysing Matrix Z tubes (2-mm zirconia beads; MP Biomedicals, Santa Ana, CA) with 500 μL ATL buffer (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) in preparation for tissue destruction and homogenization. Tissue was homogenized using a mini bead beater mill (Cole-Parmer; Vernon Hills, IL) and employing 8–10 cycles of 40-second agitations, placed on ice between bead beating steps to prevent excessive heating. DNA was isolated from homogenized tissue using DNeasy Blood & Tissue kits (Cat No./ID: 69504; Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) following manufacturer instructions with the modification of extra protein digestion. Since NA metabolites are known to form plentiful protein adducts [3537], an additional proteinase K lysis step was added to the base Qiagen protocol (Purification of Total DNA from Animal Tissues (Spin-Column Protocol)). The final proteinase K incubation time was 4 hours, with 25 μL of proteinase K (20 mg/mL) added at the beginning and 25 μL additional proteinase K added at 2 hours. Then 4 μl RNase A (100 mg/ml) was added to each sample after the proteinase K lysis step, and samples were incubated with RNase A for 2 minutes at room temperature. To maximize DNA yield from microdissected tissue samples, each sample was divided and purified through two DNAeasy columns and then recombined after elution. DNA was eluted twice, first with 200 μL and then with 100 μL of Buffer AE. DNA concentration and purity was monitored using a NanoDrop™ spectrophotometer.

AMS sample preparation and analysis.

All glass or quartz was baked prior to use following the standard practices at LLNL [38,39]. Each DNA sample suspended in water was transferred into a quartz combustion vial (6mm o.d. x 30 mm length) and dried overnight in a vacuum centrifuge. In the morning, combustion vials were removed from the centrifuge and 1-μL tributyrin (ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Costa Mesa, CA) was added as carbon carrier (0.59 mg C) to each vial using a volumetric capillary tube (Drummond Scientific Company, Broomall, PA) [35,40]. The carrier carbon is added to each purified DNA sample to ensure robust graphite formation. The use of 1-μL capillary tubes to deliver carrier improved the consistency of carrier addition over the previous technique of diluting tributyrin in methanol and adding 20–40 μL of tributyrin-methanol suspension [4143]. Each vial received ≈40 mg of CuO as it was transferred to a quartz combustion tube that was evacuated and sealed with a torch. The sealed tubes were combusted at 900 °C for 3.5 h to oxidize all organic carbon to CO2 and then reduced to filamentous carbon using Ognibene’s method [39]. Graphite samples were measured on a National Electrostatics Corporation (Middleton, WI) 250 kV single stage AMS spectrometer at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory [44]. AMS measurement times for these carrier-added graphite samples with F14C = 2–6 modern were typically 5–10 min/sample with a counting precision (relative standard deviation, RSD) of 0.5 % to 3 % and a standard deviation among 3 to 10 measurements of 1 % to 3 % [45]. The 14C/13C ratios of the samples were normalized to measurements of four identically prepared IAEA C-6 isotopic standards.

Statistics.

Measurement Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation. Microsoft Excel™ was used to perform statistical analysis. Values of p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant when performing a Student’s t-test with two-tailed, homoscedastic data.

Results and Discussion

All DNA samples were assayed for total yield and purity prior to AMS analyses. The results are shown in Table 1. The UV absorbance ratio (260 nm/280 nm) was consistent with protein free preparations. A 260/280 ratio > 1.80 is considered pure DNA. If the DNA concentration is <10 ng/ μL the spectrophotometer results are suspect. All samples were well above this limit. All DNA samples were relatively large considering the small amount of mouse lung tissue source material.

Table 1.

DNA purity and mass measurements. Samples NA1–6 received NA for seven days prior to ex vivo14C-NA dosing. Samples C1–6 received control corn oil but no NA for seven days prior to ex vivo 14C-NA dosing. Samples B1–4 were background controls that did not receive 14C-NA.

Sample Absorbance Ratio DNA Concentration Total Mass
(260/280) (ng/μl) (μg)

NA1 1.89 91.6 54.0
NA2 1.87 103.1 60.8
NA3 1.82 45.0 26.8
NA4 1.87 62.5 36.9
NA5 1.84 58.6 34.0
NA6 1.84 54.4 32.1

C1 1.92 42.1 24.8
C2 1.93 38.7 22.4
C3 1.89 45.7 26.7
C4 1.88 48.0 28.6
C5 1.85 66.1 39.3
C6 1.83 42.6 25.6

B1 1.87 96.3 54.9
B2 1.88 69.9 41.2
B3 1.80 37.5 21.9
B4 1.80 41.0 24.2

The AMS measurements of carrier added DNA presented no unexpected challenges. The tributyrin carbon carrier blanks and the undosed DNA background controls that did not receive 14C-NA both had F14C≈0.1. The F14C of the undosed DNA were slightly lower than tributyrin blanks as seen historically with the column DNA prep used, although the difference was not significant (p=0.16, Student’s T-test). The dead carbon retained in the DNA prep is probably a combination of retained solvent and column bleed. We use the undosed controls for background subtraction rather than the tributyrin carrier blanks to include this small amount of dead carbon when doing carrier added DNA analyses. The samples dosed with 14C-NA were all well elevated above the controls with measured F14C>2.

Measured isotope ratios were converted to biologically relevant units using the carbon concentration, isotope ratio and mass of carbon carrier, the specific activity of the labelled compound, the formula weight (FW) of NA, and the DNA mass. Details on the procedure can be found in the literature [4547]. The net 14C above control average in each sample was converted into mass or atoms of NA and normalized by the mass of DNA in the sample.

NA(fg)DNA(μg) = Net14C(fmole)fraction NA labeled×FW(fgfmole)×1DNA mass(μg) (1)
NA adductsDNA(pg) = Net14C(fmole)fraction NA labeled×atomsfmole×1DNA mass (pg) (2)

The ΝΑ adduct levels normalized to DNA mass as calculated in Eq. 2 are depicted in Fig. 2. Individual samples were measured precisely but the scatter between samples yielded a large standard deviation for both NA tolerance (Fig. 2A) and control tolerance (Fig. 2B) groups. Although the NA tolerance mice had fewer adducts on average, the difference compared to controls was not significant (p=0.45, Student’s T-test) due to variability between animals (Fig. 2C).

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Adduct levels of individual samples and means for NA tolerance (A) and control tolerance (B) groups. The averages are compared to each other and the undosed controls in (C). The undosed control average was −0.7±2.1 adducts/pg DNA. Each mouse cell contains 5.6 pg of nuclear DNA.

The reduction in NA-DNA adducts in the tolerant mice was consistent with previous tolerance studies of mice airways that examined Club cell toxicity, reductions in enzyme bioactivation to reactive metabolites, and detoxification mechanisms of NA [2023]. Since NA metabolites form the DNA adducts, any mechanisms that reduce the number of reactive NA metabolites also reduce the number of NA-DNA adducts. Reducing the number of Club cells from acute toxicity response directly depletes the amount of enzyme available to produce reactive metabolites. This may be the most important factor since NA-DNA adducts are rare. Repeated exposures of NA to club cells produced an increase in glutathione (GSH) resynthesis [2023]. Since GSH conjugates are the primary mechanism of detoxification, tolerance exposures increase the ability of Club cells to detoxify NA metabolites before adducts form. Nevertheless, NA-protein adducts are much more plentiful than NA-DNA adducts [35,37,48]. While a decrease in the concentrations of reactive metabolites available could lead to reduced DNA- and protein adducts, the effects may be more pronounced for protein adducts than for DNA adducts, as the present study suggests.

Conclusion

NA-DNA adduct formation in tolerance condition was examined in individual, metabolically-active mouse airways exposed ex vivo to 250 μΜ 14C-NA. DNA was extracted and 14C-NA-DNA adducts were quantified by AMS. The tolerant mice had only slightly lower NA-DNA adduct levels than controls. Thus, while the effects of tolerance - reduced numbers of Club cells and consequently reduced bioactivation enzyme activity along with enhanced detoxification from enhanced GSH - likely reduce the total amount of reactive NA metabolites available to form adducts, the impact on the number of NA-DNA adducts formed was negligible.

The AMS measurements enabled quantitation of NA derived adducts but did not identify which metabolites of NA form the adducts. Identification of specific NA metabolite adducts requires quantitative digestion of the DNA into individual nucleotides followed by a molecular separation and then quantitation. The HPLC liquid sample interface coupled to MS and AMS with a variable flow splitter could be employed to identify specific adducts [49,50].

Ex vivo dosing was used since it avoided creation of a radioactive aerosol of a potential carcinogen. This ex vivo dosing approach can be used to quantify adduct formation or receptor binding of volatile chemicals or aerosols in respiratory tissue. When working with acute toxins or potential infectious agents, keeping the test compounds in the liquid phase is much safer.

Acknowledgements

Funded by NIH R01 ES020867, ES020867S1 P41GM103483 and DOD LC130820.

This work performed in part under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract DE-AC52–07NA27344. LLNL-JRNL-741718. This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, nor any of their employees makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.

Footnotes

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

  • 1.Loh MM, Levy JI, Spengler JD, Houseman EA, Bennett DH, Ranking Cancer Risks of Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants in the United States, Environ. Health Perspect 115 (2007) 1160. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Jia C, Batterman S, Godwin C, VOCs in industrial, urban and suburban neighborhoods, Part 1: Indoor and outdoor concentrations, variation, and risk drivers, Atmos. Environ 42 (2008)2083. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Batterman S, Chin J-Y, Jia C, Godwin C, Parker E, Robins T, Max P, Lewis T, Sources, concentrations, and risks of naphthalene in indoor and outdoor air, Indoor Air 22 (2012) 266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Jung KH, Liu B, Lovinsky-Desir S, Yan BZ, Camann D, Sjodin A, Li Z, Perera F, Kinney P, Chillrud S, Miller RL. Time trends of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon exposure in New York city from 2001 to 2012: Assessed by repeat air and urine samples, Environ. Res 131(2014) 95. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Bailey LA, Nascarella MA, Kerper LE, Rhomberg LR, Hypothesis-based weight- of-evidence evaluation and risk assessment for naphthalene carcinogenesis, Crit. Rev. Toxicol 46 (2016) 1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Li Z, Sandau CD, Romanoff LC, Caudill SP, Sjodin A, Needham LL, Patterson DG, Concentration and profile of 22 urinary polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon metabolites in the US population, Environ. Res 107 (2008) 320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Orjuela MA, Liu X, Miller RL, Warburton D, Tang D, Jobanputra V, Hoepner L, Suen IH, Diaz-Carreno S, Li Z, et al. , Urinary naphthol metabolites and chromosomal aberrations in 5-year-old children, Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev 21 (2012) 1191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Liu B, Jia C, Effects of profession on urinary PAH metabolite levels in the US population, Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 89 (2016) 123. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Yang P, Wang YX, Chen YJ, Sun L, Li J, Liu C, Huang Z, Lu WQ, Zeng Q, Urinary polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon metabolites and human semen quality in China, Environ. Sci. Technol 51 (2017) 958. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Guo Y, Senthilkumar K, Alomirah Hu., Moon HB, Minh TB, Mohd MA, Nakata H, Kannan K, Concentrations and profiles of urinary polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon metabolites (OH-PAHs) in several Asian countries, Environ. Sci. Technol 47 (2013) 2932. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Poursafa P, Amin MM, Hajizadeh Y, Mansourian M, Pourzmami H, Ebrahim K, Sadeghian B, Kelishadi R, Association of atmospheric concetrations of polycyclic hydrocarbons with their urinary metabolites in children and adolescents, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res 24 (2017) 17136. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Abdo KM, Grumbein S, Chou BJ, Herbert R. Toxicity and carcinogenicity study in F344 rats following 2 years of whole-body exposure to naphthalene vapors, Inhal. Toxicol 13 (2001) 931. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Abdo K, Eustis S, McDonald M, Jokinen M, Adkins B, Haseman J,1992. Naphthalene: A respiratory tract toxicant and carcinogen for mice, Inhal. Toxicol. 4 (1992) 393. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.National Toxicology Program. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of naphthalene (cas no. 91–20-3) in B6C3F1 mice (inhalation studies). National Toxicology Program Technical Report Series 410,(1992) 1–172. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.National Toxicology Program. Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of Naphthalene (CAS NO. 91–20-3) in F344/N Rats (Inhalation Studies). Research Triangle Park, NC, U.S. Depeartment of Health and Human Services, National Toxicology Program Technical Report Series 500 (2000) 1–169. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.North DW, Abdo KM, Benson JM, Dahl AR, Morris JB, Renne R, Witschi H, A review of whole animal bioassays of the carcinogenic potential of naphthalene, Regul. Toxicol. & Pharmacol 51 (2008) S6–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Waddell WJ. Dose response curves in chemical carcinogenesis, Nonlinearity Biol. Toxicol. Med 2 (2004) 11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Neumann HG. Risk assessment of chemical carcinogens and thresholds, Crit. Rev. Toxicol 39 (2009) 449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Rhomberg LR, Goodman JE, Haber LT, Dourson M, Andersen ME, Klaunig JE, Meek B, Price PS, McClellan RO, Cohen SM. Linear low-dose extrapolation for noncancer health effects is the exception, not the rule, Crit. Rev. Toxicol 41 (2011) 1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.West JA, Buckpitt JA,AR, Plopper CG, Elevated airway GSH resynthesis confers protection to Clara cells from naphthalene injury in mice made tolerant by repeated exposures, J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther 294 (2000) 516. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.West JA, Williams KJ, Toskala E, Nishio SJ, Fleschner CA, Forman HJ, Buckpitt AR, Plopper CG. Induction of tolerance to naphthalene in Clara cells is dependent on a stable phenotypic adaptation favoring maintenance of the glutathione pool, Am. J. Pathol 160 (2002) 1115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.West JA, Van Winkle LS, Morin D, Fleschner CA, Forman HJ, Plopper CG, 2003. Repeated Inhalation Exposures of the Bioactivated Cytotoxicant Naphthalene (NA) Produce Airway Specific Clara Cell Tolerance in Mice, Toxicol. Sci 75 (2003) 161. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Sutherland KM, Edwards PC, Combs TJ, Van Winkle LS, Sex differences in the development of airway epithelial tolerance to naphthalene, Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol 302 (2012) L68. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Currie LA, Eglinton TI, Benner BA, Pearson A, Radiocarbon ‘‘dating’’ of individual chemical compounds in atmospheric aerosol: First results comparing direct isotopic and multivariate statistical apportionment of specific polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B 123 (1997) 475. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Lanz VA, Alfarra NR, Baltensperger U, Buchmann B, Hueglin C, Szidat S, Wehrli MH, Wacker L, Weimer S, Caseiro A, Puxbaum H, Prevot ASH, Source attribution of submicron organic aerosols during wintertime inversions by advanced factor analysis of aerosol mass spectra, Environ. Sci. Technol 42 (2008) 214. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Schichtel BA, Malm WC, Bench G, Fallon S, McDade CE, Chow JC, Watson JG, Fossil and contemporary fine particulate carbon fractions at 12 rural and urban sites in the United States, J. Geophys. Res 113 (2008) D02311. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Zhang YL, Huang RJ, El Haddad I, Ho KF, Cao JJ, Han Y, Zotter P, Bozzetti C, Daellenbach KR, Canonaco F, Slowick JG, Salazar G, Schikowski M, Schnelle- Kreis J, Abbaszade G, Zimmerman R, Baltensperger U, Prevot ASH, Szidat S, Fossil vs.non-fossil sources of fine carbonaceous aerosols in four Chinese cities during the extreme winter haze episode of 2013, Atmos. Chem. Phys 15 (2015) 1299. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Madeen E, Corley RA, Crowell S, Turteltaub K, Ognibene T, Malfatti M, McQuistan TJ, Garrard M, Sudakin D, Williams DE, Human in vivo pharmacokinetics of [14C]dibenzo[def,p]chrysene by accelerator mass spectrometry following oral microdosing, Chem. Res. Toxicol 28 (2015) 126. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Madeen EP, Ognibene TJ, Corley RA, McQuistan TJ, Henderson MC, Baird WM, Bench G, Turteltaub KW, Williams DE, Human microdosing with carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: In vivo pharmacokinetics of dibenzo[def,p]chrysene and metabolites by UPLC accelerator mass spectrometry, Chem. Res. Toxicol 29 (2016) 1641. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Morris JB, Nasal dosimetry of inspired naphthalene vapor in the male and female B6C3F1 mouse, Toxicol. 309 (2013) 66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Duan X, Plopper C, Brennan P, Buckpitt A. Rates of glutathione synthesis in lung subcompartments of mice and monkeys: Possible role in species and site selective injury, J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther 277 (1996) 1402. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Carratt SA, Morin D, Buckpitt AR, Edwards PC, Van Winkle LS. Naphthalene cytotoxicity in microsomal epoxide hydrolase deficient mice, Toxicol. Let 246 (2016) 35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Plopper CG, Chang AM, Pang A, Buckpitt AR. Use of microdissected airways to define metabolism and cytotoxicity in murine bronchiolar epithelium, Exp. Lung Res 17 (1991) 197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Van Winkle LS, Buckpitt AR, Plopper CG. Maintenance of differentiated murine Clara cells in microdissected airway cultures, Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol 14(1996)586. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Buchholz BA, Haack KW, Sporty JL, Buckpitt AR, Morin D, Free flow electrophoresis separation and AMS quantitation of 14C-naphthalene-protein adducts, Nucl. Instrum Methods Phys. Res. B 268 (2010) 1324. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.DeStefano-Shields C, Morin D, Buckpitt A, Formation of covalently bound protein adducts from the cytotoxicant naphthalene in nasal epithelium: species comparisons. Environ. Health Perspect 118 (2010) 647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Cho M, Chichester C, Morin D, Plopper C, Buckpitt A, Covalent interactions of reactive naphthalene metabolites with proteins, J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther 269 (1994) 881. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Buchholz BA, Freeman SPHT, Haack KW, Vogel JS, Tips and traps in the biological 14C AMS prep lab, Nucl. Instr. Meth. B 172 (2000) 404. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Ognibene TJ, Bench G, Vogel JS, Peaslee GF, Murov S, A high-throughput method for the conversion of CO2 obtained from biochemical samples to graphite in septa-sealed vials for quantification of 14C via accelerator mass spectrometry, Anal. Chem 75 (2003) 2192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Zhao C, Hwang SH, Buchholz BA, Carpenter TS, Lightstone F, Yang J, Hammock BD, Casida JE, GABAa receptor target of tetramethylenedisulfotetramine, PNAS 111 (2014) 8607. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Buchholz BA, Fultz E, Haack KW, Vogel JS, Gilman SD, Gee SJ, Hammock BD, Hui X, Wester RC and Maibach HI, HPLC-accelerator MS measurement of atrazine metabolites in human urine after dermal exposure, Anal. Chem 71 (1999) 3519. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Shan G, Huang W, Gee SJ, Buchholz BA, Vogel JS, Hammock BD. Isotope labelled immunoassays without radioactive waste, PNAS 97 (2000) 2445. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Miyashita M, Presley JM, Buchholz BA, Lam KS, Lee YM, Vogel JS, Hammock BD, Attomole level protein sequencing by Edman degradation coupled with accelerator mass spectrometry, PNAS 98 (2001) 4403. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Ognibene TJ, Haack KW, Bench G, Turteltaub KW. Trials and tribulations in the first three years in operation of the SSAMS for biomedical 14C-AMS at LLNL., Nucl. Instr. Meth. B (2018), 10.1016/j.nimb.2018.05.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Mortimer M, Petersen EJ, Buchholz BA, Orias E, Holden PA. Bioaccumulation of multiwall carbon nanotubes in Tetrahymena thermophila by direct feeding or trophic transfer, Environ. Sci. Tech 50 (2016) 8876. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Kwok ESC, Buchholz BA, Vogel JS, Turteltaub KW, Eastmond DA, Dose-dependent binding of ortho-Phenylphenol to protein but not DNA in the urinary bladder of male F344 rats, Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 159 (1999) 18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Vogel JS and Love AH, Quantitating isotopic molecular labels with accelerator mass spectrometry, Methods Enzymol. 402 (2005) 402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Kultz D, Li J, Sacchi R, Morin D, Buckpitt A, VanWinkle L. Alterations in the proteome of the respiratory tract response to single and multiple exposures to naphthalene. Proteomics 15 (2015) 2655. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Thomas AT, Ognibene T, Daley P, Turteltaub K, Radousky H, Bench G, Ultrahigh efficiency moving wire combustion interface for online coupling of high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), Anal. Chem 83 (2011) 9413. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Thomas AT, Stewart BJ, Ognibene TJ, Turteltaub KW, Bench G. Directly Coupled High-Performance Liquid Chromatography-Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Measurement of Chemically Modified Protein and Peptides, Anal. Chem 85 (2013) 3644. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES