Effects of concurrent administration of monensin and selenium on erythrocyte glutathione peroxidase activity and liver selenium concentration in broiler chickens
- 44 Downloads
- 1 Citations
Abstract
Different toxic doses of selenium and monensin preparations were administered to broiler chickens. The two substances were given by oral route, alone or concurrently, for variable periods. Erythrocyte glutathione peroxidase. (GSH-Px) activity was found to be elevated after the administration of the drugs. This increase was considerably higher when selenium and monensin were administered concurrently, indicating the occurrence of strong interaction between them. Administration of selenium led to a rapid increase in the liver selenium concentration. This increase, in turn, was enhanced by concurrent application of monensin. Monensin given alone did not have any significant effect on the changes of liver selenium concentration. Further results suggest that administration of monensin increases erythrocyte GSH-Px activity, even in the absence of supplemental selenium or during increased liver selenium concentration.
Index Entries
Selenium selenium status selenium toxicosis monensin monensin toxicosis chicken broilers erythrocyte glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) activityPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.V. C. Langston, F. Galey, R. Lovell and W. B. Buck,Rev. Vet. Med. 80(10), 75 (1985).Google Scholar
- 2.T. Umemura, H. Nakamura, M. Goryo and C. Itakura,Avian Pathol. 13, 459 (1984).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 3.J. F. van Vleet, H. E. Amstutz, W. E. Weirch, A. H. Rebar and V. J. Ferrans,Am. J. Vet. Res. 44(8), 1460 (1983).PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.J. B. A. Smyth, G. H. Wang, D. J. Barlow, D. J. Huphreys, M. Robins and J. B. J. Stodulski,J. Comp. Pathol. 102, 433 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.M. Z. Khan, J. Szarek, M. Saeed, A. Koncicki and A. Krasnodębska-Depta,J. Vet. Med. B40, 667 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.P. H. Anderson, S. Berrett, J. Catchpole, M. W. Gregory and D. C. Brown,Vet. Rec. 113(21), 298 (1983).Google Scholar
- 7.G. Salyi, M. Mezes and G. Banhidi,Acta. Vet. Hung. 38(4), 263 (1991).Google Scholar
- 8.C. K. Chow and A. L. Tappel,J. Nutr. 104, 444 (1974).PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.D. G. Hafeman, R. A. Sunde and W. G. Hoekstra,J. Nutr. 104, 580 (1974).PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.S. T. Omaye and A. L. Tappel,J. Nutr. 104(6), 747 (1974).PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.G. Carlstrom, G. Jonsson and B. Pehrson,Swedish J. Agric. Res. 9, 43 (1979).Google Scholar
- 12.D. E. Paglia and W. N. Valentine,J. Lab. Clin. Med. 70, 158 (1967).PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.J. Hopkins and G. R. Thudhope,B. J. Haematol. 25, 563 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.R. R. Brook, J. A. Willis and J. R. Liddle,J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 66(1), 130 (1983).Google Scholar
- 15.R. G. D. Steel and J. H. Torrie,Principles and Procedures of Statistics, McGraw-Hill, New York, Toronto, London (1960).Google Scholar
- 16.R. A. Lawrence and R. F. Burk,J. Nutr. 108, 211 (1978).PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.J. R. Prohaska and H. E. Ganther,Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 76, 437 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.G. Kovac and S. Sankari,Tolia Vet. 32(2), 79 (1988).Google Scholar