CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 67Air Quality and Health ImpactsIndoor Air Quality and Microbial ExposureAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Alveolar macrophage interaction with air pollution particulates.

Open access
Goldsmith, C A, Frevert, C, Imrich, A, Sioutas, C, Kobzik, L·1997·Environmental Health Perspectives
DOI 10.1289/ehp.97105s51191PMC PMC1470148
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We applied flow cytometric analysis to characterize the in vitro response of alveolar macrophages (AM) to air pollution particulates. Normal hamster AM were incubated with varying concentrations of residual oil fly ash (ROFA) or concentrated ambient air particulates (CAP). We found a dose-dependent increase in AM-associated right angle light scatter (RAS) after uptake of ROFA (e.g., mean channel number 149.4 +/- 6.5, 102.5 +/- 4.1, 75.8 +/- 3.5, and 61.0 +/- 4.6 at 200, 100, 50, and 25 mg/ml, respectively) or CAP. A role for scavenger-type receptors (SR) in AM uptake of components of ROFA and CAP was identified by marked inhibition of RAS increases in AM pretreated with the specific SR inhibitor polyinosinic acid. We combined measurement of particle uptake (RAS) with flow cytometric analysis of intracellular oxidation of dichlorofluorescin. Both ROFA and CAP caused a dose-related intracellular oxidant stress within AM, comparable to that seen with phorbol myristate acetate (PMA) (e.g., fold increase over control, 6.6 +/- 0.4, 3.6 +/- 0.4, 4.6 +/- 0.5, 200 mg/ml ROFA, 100 mg/ml ROFA, and 10(-7) M PMA, respectively). We conclude that flow cytometry of RAS increases provides a useful relative measurement of AM uptake of complex particulates within ROFA and CAP. Both ROFA and CAP cause substantial intracellular oxidant stress within AM, which may contribute to subsequent cell activation and production of proinflammatory mediators.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1289/ehp.97105s51191

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The major lung defence is performed by alveolar macrophages that are capable of iron scavenging, protecting lung tissue against oxidative damage.

    “However, the major lung defence is performed by one class of macrophages (alveolar macrophages) that, interacting and responding to various stresses, are capable of iron scavenging too, protecting lung tissue against oxidative damage232425.”

    From The interaction of asbestos and iron in lung tissue revealed by synchrotron-based scanning X-ray microscopy (2013) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Introduction (p. 1191) says alveolar macrophages ingest and remove inhaled particulates, supporting their lung-defence role. It does not say they scavenge iron or thereby protect lung tissue from oxidative damage; instead, the paper reports that particle uptake causes intracellular oxidant stress in these cells. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Goldsmith, C. A., Frevert, C., Imrich, A., Sioutas, C., & Kobzik, L.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Environmental Health Perspectives
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
1997-09
Volume
105
Issue
suppl 5
Pages
1191-1195
ISSN
  • 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-9924
DOI
10.1289/ehp.97105s51191
PMC
PMC1470148
OpenAlex
W2080049917
Cited by
65
References
16
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • Environmental Health Perspectives (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  • National Institutes of Health (00002)
  • U.S. Public Health Service (00002)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL-07118, T32HL007118)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Indoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Keywords
alveolar macrophages, residual oil fly ash, scavenger receptors, polyinosinic acid, particle uptake, phorbol myristate acetate, macrophage activation, pro-inflammatory mediators
MeSH terms
Air Pollutants, Animals, Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid, Carbon, Coal, Flow Cytometry, Cricetinae, Mesocricetus, Phagocytosis, Free Radical Scavengers, Macrophages, Alveolar, Oxidants, Oxidative Stress, Particulate Matter, Coal Ash

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review