Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine

, Volume 82, Issue 2, pp 1262–1265 | Cite as

Morphohistochemical study of the rat placenta after exposure to carbon tetrachloride at different stages of pregnancy

  • N. I. Tsirel'nikov
  • T. G. Tsirel'nikova
Morphology and Pathomorphology

Abstract

Intraventricular injection of CCl4 (0.3 ml/100 g body weight) into female rats causes marked injury to the tissues of the placenta and, in particular, to the chorionic epithelium of the labyrinthine portion, with maximal development of degenerative and necrobiotic changes on the 14th–16th day of pregnancy (if the poison is injected 48 h before sacrifice). An increase in the number of mitotically dividing epithelial cells is observed at all times and the dimensions of the nuclei and nucleoli of the cytotrophoblastic cells are increased on the 17th–18th day of intrauterine development of the fetus. Injection of CCl4 leads to a decrease in the content of histochemically detectable glycogen in the cytoplasm of the chorionic epithelium and a decrease in the content of amylase-resistant glycoproteins, protein, and RNA in the degenerating cells.

Key Words

Placenta CCl4 necrobiotic changes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    V. I. Bodyazhina and A. P. Kiryushchenkov, in: Antenatal Protection of the Fetus [in Russian], Moscow (1968), pp. 48–56.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. S. Volkova, Immunobiological Interrelations between Mother and Fetus [in Russian], Moscow (1970).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    O. E. Vyazov, The Immunology of Embryogenesis [in Russian], Moscow (1962).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    T. F. Grenberg, Trudy Leningrad. San. Gig. Med. Inst.,82, 37 (1967).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Ya. Kabak, Textbook of Practical Endocrinology [in Russian], Moscow (1968).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. I. Tereza, Byull. Éksp. Biol. Med., No. 5, 492 (1937).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. S. Shtern, Akush. Ginekol., No. 3, 1 (1927).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    K. Bhattacharyya, J. Path. Bact.,90, 151 (1955).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Chassagne, Acta Inst. Anesth.,11, 185 (1962).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B. Kütuktschion and L. Matrova, Wiss. Z. Friedrich Schiller Univ. (Jena), Math. Naturwiss. Reihe,17, 33 (1968).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    U. Montemagno, M. Di Stefano, and A. Cardone, Monit. Ostet. Ginec.,36, 481 (1965).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    B. Murphy, S. Clark, Y. Donald, et al., Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.,118, 538 (1974).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. Noschel and A. Kuhnert, Zbl. Gynäk.,92, 1384 (1970).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Reddy, K. Krishnamurthy, and G. Bhuskar, Arch. Path.,74, 73 (1962).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. Von Roschlan and H. Rodenkirchen, Exp. Path. (Jena),3, 255 (1969).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. P. L. Roussel and H. Tuchmann-Duplessis, Bull. Assoc. Anat.,139, 1072 (1968).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. I. Tsirel'nikov
  • T. G. Tsirel'nikova

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations