Radiation and Environmental Biophysics

, Volume 45, Issue 3, pp 167–177 | Cite as

Transgenerational accumulation of radiation damage in small mammals chronically exposed to Chernobyl fallout

Original Paper

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation has been the analysis of the long-term development of biological damage in natural populations of a model mammalian species, the bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus, Schreber), which were chronically exposed to low doses of ionizing radiation over 22 animal generations within 10 years following the Chernobyl accident. The time course of the biological end-points (chromosome aberrations in bone marrow cells and embryonic lethality) was compared with the time course of the whole-body absorbed dose rate from external and internal exposure in the studied populations inhabiting monitoring sites in Belarus with different ground deposition of radionuclides. The yield of chromosome aberrations and, in lesser degree, embryonic lethality was associated with the radionuclide contamination of the monitoring areas in a dose-dependent manner. As a main feature of the long-term development of biological damage under low dose rate irradiation, permanently elevated levels of chromosome aberrations and an increasing frequency of embryonic lethality have developed over 22 animal generations. This contrasts with the assumption that the biological damage would gradually disappear since in the same period of time the whole-body absorbed dose rate decreased exponentially with a half-value time of about 2.5–3 years. Furthermore, gravid females were captured, and their offspring, born and grown up under contamination-free laboratory conditions, showed the same enhanced level of chromosome aberrations. Therefore the authors suggest that, along with the biological damage attributable to the individual exposure of each animal, the observed cellular and systemic effects reflect the transgenerational transmission and accumulation, via genetic and/or epigenetic pathways, of damage attributable to the chronic low-dose rate exposure of the preceding generations of animals. They also suggest that the level of the accumulated transmissible damage in the investigated populations will decrease in future due to the further recession of the chronic exposure and as a consequence of selection processes.

References

  1. 1.
    De Cort M, Dubois G, Fridman ShD, Germenchuk MG, Izrael YuA, Janssens A, Jones AR, Kelly GN, Kvasnikova EV, Matveenko II, Nazarov IM, Pokumeiko YuM, Sitak VA, Stukin ED, Tabachny LYa, Tsaturov YuS, Avdyushin SI (1998) Atlas of caesium deposition in Europe after the Chernobyl accident. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sankaranarayanan K, Chakraborty R (2000) Ionizing radiation and genetic risks XI. The doubling dose estimates from the mid-1950s to the present and the conceptual change to use of human data on spontaneous mutation rates and mouse data on induced mutation rates for doubling dose calculations. Mutat Res 453:107–27Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shevchenko VA, Pomerantseva MD (1985) Genetic consequences of ionizing irradiation (in Russian). Nauka, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    UNSCEAR (2001) Hereditary effects of radiation. Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the effects of atomic radiation, United Nations. New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ryabokon NI, Goncharova RI (2003) Natural populations of murine rodents as model objects in studying the transgenerational effects of chronic irradiation. In: Cebulska-Wasilewska A (ed) Human monitoring for genetic effects, NATO Science Series, Series I. Life and behavioral sciences 351, IOS Press, pp 302–308Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goncharova RI, Ryabokon NI, Smolich II (1999) Biological effects of low-dose chronic irradiation in somatic cells of small mammals. In: Goossens LHJ (ed) Risk analysis: facing the new millennium. Proceedings of the 9th annual conference, Delft University Press, Rotterdam, pp 710–714Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goncharova RI, Ryabokon NI (1995) Dynamics of cytogenetic injuries in natural populations of bank vole in the Republic of Belarus. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 62:37–40Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goncharova R, Riabokon N (1998) Results of long-term genetic monitoring of animal populations chronically irradiated in the radiocontaminated areas. In: Imanaka T (ed) Research activities about the radiological consequences of the Chernobyl NPS accident and social activities to assist the sufferers by the accident. Kyoto University, pp 194–202Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ryabokon NI, Smolich II, Kudryashov VP, Goncharova RI (2005) Long-term development of the radionuclide exposure of murine rodent populations in Belarus after the Chernobyl accident. Radiat Environ Biophys 44:169–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bashenina NV (ed) Bank vole (1981) (in Russian) Soviet Committee for the UNESCO Programme “Man and Biosphere”, Nauka, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rozhdestvenskaya A (1994) Peculiarities of reproduction of bank voles in the radiocontaminated environment. Pol Ecol Stud 20:509–515Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Adler I-D (1984) Cytogenetic tests in mammals. In: Venitt S, Parry JM (eds) Mutagenicity testing: a practical approach. IRL Press, Oxford, pp 275–306Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Savage JR (1975) Classification and relationships of induced chromosomal structural changes. J Med Genet 12:103–122Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Anderson D (1984) The dominant lethal test in rodents. In: Venitt S, Parry JM (eds) Mutagenicity testing: a practical approach. IRL Press, Oxford, pp 307–335Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yeliseeva KG, Kraskovsky GV, Mironova GI, Podliskikh GA, Krischanovich UU, Kukhlyankova SS, Myal’nou SB, Razhdestvenskaya AS (1985) Study on genetic changes in bone marrow cells of bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus) living in regions with different level of highway contamination (in Belarusan). Vesti AN BSSR, Biol Ser 1:75–79Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Razhdzestvenskaya AS (1984) Distinctions of age structure, propagation and mortality of two European bank vole populations (in Belarusan). Vesti AN BSSR, Biol Ser 5:103–106Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cristaldi M, Ieradi LA, Mascanzoni D, Mattei T (1991) Environmental impact of the Chernobyl accident: mutagenesis in bank voles from Sweden. Int J Radiat Biol 59:31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sinclair WK (1964) X ray induced heritable damage (small colony formation) in cultured mammalian cells. Radiat Res 21:584–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kennedy AR, Fox M., Murphy G, Little JB (1980) Relationship between X-ray exposure and malignant transformation in C3H 10T1/2 cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 77:7262–7266CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pampfer S, Streffer C (1989) Increased chromosome aberration levels in cells from mouse fetuses after zygote X-irradiation. Int J Radiat Biol 55:85–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Limoli CL, Ponnaiya B, Corcoran J.J, Giedzinski E, Kaplan MI, Hartman A, Morgan WF (2000) Genomic instability induced by high and low LET ionizing radiation. Adv Space Res 25:2107–2117CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Watson GE, Pocock DA, Papworth D, Lorimore SA, Wright EG (2001) In vivo chromosomal instability and transmissible aberrations in the progeny of haemopoietic stem cells induced by high- and low-LET radiations. Int J Radiat Biol 77:409–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Smith LE, Nagar S, Kim GJ, Morgan WF (2003) Radiation-induced genomic instability: radiation quality and dose response. Health Phys 1:23–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Devi PU, Hossain M. (2000) Induction of chromosomal instability in mouse hemopoietic cells by fetal irradiation. Mutat Res 456:33–37Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kadhim MF (2003) Role of genetic background in induced instability. Oncogene 22:6994–6999CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Streffer C (2003) Bystander effects, adaptive response and genomic instability induced by prenatal irradiation. Mutat Res 568:79–87Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ponnaiya B, Jenkins-Baker G, Bigelov A, Marino S, Geard CR (2004) Detection of chromosomal instability in alpha-irradiated and bystander human fibroblasts. Mut Res 568:41–48Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Little JB, Nagasawa H, Pfenning T, Vetrovs H (1997) Radiation-induced genomic instability: delayed mutagenic and cytogenetic effects of X rays and alpha particles. Radiat Res 148:299–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mothersill C, Kadhim MA, O’Reilly S, Papworth D, Marsden SJ, Seymour CB, Wright EG (2000) Dose- and time-response relationships for lethal mutations and chromosomal instability induced by ionizing radiation in an immortalized human keratinocyte cell line. Int J Radiat Biol 76:799–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Grosovsky AJ, Parks KK, Giver CR, Nelson S (1996) Clonal analysis of delayed karyotypic abnormalities and gene mutations in radiation-induced genetic instability. Mol Cell Biol 16:6252–6262Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bridges BA (2001) Radiation and germline mutation at repeat sequences: are we in the middle of a paradigm shift? Radiat Res 156:631–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Barcellos-Hoff MH, Brooks A (2001) Extracellular signaling through microenvironment: a hypothesis relating carcinogenesis, bystander effects and genomic instability. Radiat Res 156:618–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Geiman TM, Sankpal UT, Robertson AK, Chen Y, Mazumdar M, Heale JT, Schmiesing JA, Kim W, Yokomori K, Zhao Y, Robertson KD (2004) Isolation and characterization of a novel DNA methyltransferase complex linking DNMT3B with components of the mitotic chromosome condensation machinery. Nucleic Acids Res 32:2716–2729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Greinert R, Detzler E, Harder D (2000) The kinetics of postirradiation chromatin restitution as revealed by chromosome aberrations detected by premature chromosome condensation and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Radiat Res 154:87–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Nomura T (1982) Parental exposure to X-ray and chemicals induces heritable tumours and anomalies in mice. Nature 256:575–577CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wiley LM, Baulch JE, Raabe OG, Straume T (1997) Impaired cell proliferation in mice that persists across at least two generations after paternal irradiation. Radiat Res 148:145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pils S, Muller WU, Streffer C (1999) Lethal and teratogenic effects in two successive generations of the HLG mouse strain after radiation exposure of zygotes— association with genomic instability? Mutat Res 429:85–92Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kropacova K, Slovinska L, Misurova E (2002) Cytogenetic changes in the liver of progeny of irradiated male rats. J Radiat Res (Tokyo) 43:125–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dubrova YuE (2003) Radiation-induced transgenerational instability. Oncogene 22:7087–7093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Morgan WF (2003) Non-targeted and delayed effects of exposure to ionizing radiation: II. Radiation-induced genomic instability and bystander effects in vivo, clastogenic factors and transgenerational effects. Radiat Res 159:581–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nomura T, Nakajima H, Ryo H, Li LY, Fukudome Y, Adachi S, Gotoh H, Tanaka H (2004) Transgenerational transmission of radiation- and chemically induced tumors and congenital anomalies in mice: studies of their possible relationship to induced chromosomal and molecular changes. Cytogen Genome Res 104:252–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Streffer C (2006) Transgenerational transmission of radiation damage: genome instability and congenital malformation (publication dedicated to Prof. Nomura, in print)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Niwa O, Kominami R (2001) Untargeted mutation of the maternally derived mouse hypervariable minisatellite allele in F1 mice born to irradiated spermatozoa. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:1705–1710CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Vorobtsova IE (1989) Increased cancer risk as a genetic effect of ionizing radiation. IARC Sci Publ 96:389–401Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Burruel VR, Raabe OG, Wiley LM (1997) In vitro fertilization rate of mouse oocytes with spermatozoa from the F1 offspring of males irradiated with 1.0 Gy 137Cs gamma-rays. Mutat Res 381:59–66Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Dubrova YE, Grant G, Chumak AA, Stezhka VA, Karasian AN (2002) Elevated minisatellite mutation rate in post-Chernobyl families from Ukraine. Am J Hum Genet 71:801–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ellegren H, Lindgren G, Primmer CR, Moller AP (1997) Fitness loss and germline mutations in barn swallows breeding in Chernobyl. Nature 389:593–596CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gileva EA, Liubashevskij NM, Starichenko VI, Chibiriak MV, Romanov GN (1996) Hereditary chromosome instability in the common vole (Microtus arvalis) from the region of the Kyshtym nuclear accident—fact or hypothesis? Genetica (in Russian) 32:114–119Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Genetics and CytologyNational Academy of Sciences of BelarusMinskRepublic of Belarus

Personalised recommendations