↓ Skip to main content

Assessing developmental toxicity of caffeine and sweeteners in medaka (Oryzias latipes)

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
Assessing developmental toxicity of caffeine and sweeteners in medaka (Oryzias latipes)
Published in
SpringerPlus, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40064-015-1284-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wenjau Lee, Yun-Chi Wang

Abstract

The use of artificial sweeteners (ASWs) has increased and become more widespread, and consequently ASWs have appeared in aquatic environments around the world. However, their safety to the health of humans and wildlife remains inconclusive. In this study, using medaka embryos (Oryzias latipes), we investigated developmental toxicity of aspartame (ASP) and saccharin (SAC). Since ASWs are often consumed with caffeine (CAF) and CAF with sucrose (SUC), we tested biological activities of these four substances and the mixtures of CAF with each sweetener. The embryos were exposed to ASP at 0.2 and 1.0 mM, SAC at 0.005 and 0.050 mM, CAF at 0.05 and 0.5 mM, or SUC at 29 and 146 mM, starting from less than 5 h post fertilization until hatch. Control embryos were treated with embryo solution only. Several endpoints were used to evaluate embryonic development. Some of the hatchlings were also tested for anxiety-like behavior with the white preference test. The results showed that all four substances and the mixtures of CAF with the sweeteners affected development. The most sensitive endpoints were the heart rate, eye density, and hatchling body length. The hatchlings of several treatment groups also exhibited anxiety-like behavior. We then used the Integrated Biological Response (IBR) as an index to evaluate the overall developmental toxicity of the substances. We found that the ranking of developmental toxicity was SAC > CAF > ASP > SUC, and there was a cumulative effect when CAF was combined with the sweeteners.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 20%
Student > Master 11 18%
Other 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Researcher 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 19 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 9 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 8%
Chemistry 4 7%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 20 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 February 2016.
All research outputs
#18,425,370
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,260
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,820
of 267,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#83
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,498 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.