Table 3.
Percentage of chromosomal aberrations in mouse spermatocytes and sperm abnormalities induced after treatment with carmustine and Codiaeum variegatum
| Treatment and doses | Total abnormal metaphases | No. of different types of sperm abnormalities | Total abnormal sperm | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | Mean(%) ± SE | Head abnormalities | Tail abnormalities | No | Mean (%) ± SE | |
| I. Control (30% ethanol) | 19 | 3.80 ± 0.37 a | 126 | 86 | 212 | 4.24 ± 0.19a |
| II.Carmustine (30 mg / kg) | 84 | 16.80 ± 0.97c | 274 | 252 | 526 | 10.52 ± 0.21e |
| III. Codiaeum variegatum (500 mg/kg) | 16 | 3.20 ± 0.49 a | 122 | 104 | 226 | 4.52 ± 0.38a |
| IV-VI- Carmustine + Codiaeum variegatum | ||||||
| + 100 mg/kg | 54 | 10.80 ± 0.97 b | 276 | 201 | 477 | 9.54 ± 0.46d |
| + 300 mg/kg | 46 | 9.20 ± 0.58b | 191 | 191 | 382 | 7.64 ± 0.31c |
| + 500 mg/kg | 43 | 8.60 ± 0.75 b | 156 | 164 | 320 | 6.40 ± 0.24 b |
A total of 500 cells were analyzed for chromosomal aberrations (5 mice per group; 100 cells/mouse). Total number of examined sperms 5000 per each treatment (1000 /mouse, 5 mice/group). One way ANOVA–Tukey’s multiple comparisons test was used. The values having different superscript letters in each column are significantly different from one another at p < 0.05