Protective effects of Fragaria ananassa methanolic extract in a rat model of cadmium chloride-induced neurotoxicity
Authors: Rami B Kassab
Dina Metwally
Rafa S Almeer
Hatem K Amin
Ebtesam M Al-Olayan
Ehab A Essawy
Manal F Elkhadragy
Rewaida Abdel-Gaber
Ahmed E Abdel Moneim
Journal: Bioscience Reports (2018)
Discipline: MOLECULAR BIOLOGY & GENETICS
Keywords: Fragaria ananassa; apoptosis; brain; cadmium; oxidative stress.
Affiliations: Department of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia  ., Department of Zoology and Entomology, Faculty of Science, Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt., Department of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia., Department of Parasitology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt., Zoology Department, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt., Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt., Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Pharmacy, Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt., Department of Zoology and Entomology, Faculty of Science, Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt  .

Abstract:  Cadmium (Cd) is a common environmental toxicant that has harmful effects on plants, animals, and humans. The present study evaluated the protective effects of Fragaria ananassa methanolic extract (SME) on cadmium chloride (CdCl2)-induced neuronal toxicity in rats. Male albino rats were intraperitoneally (i.p) injected with CdCl2 (6.5 mg/kg) for 5 days with or without the SME (250 mg/kg). We measured the levels of Cd, lipid peroxidation (LPO), nitric oxide, glutathione (GSH), and oxidative enzymes such as superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), glutathione peroxidase, and glutathione reductase (GR) in the whole brain homogenate. Compared with the control group, the Cd-intoxicated group showed a marked increase in the brain levels of Cd, LPO, and nitric oxide and a decrease in the levels of GSH and all tested antioxidant enzymes. Compared with Cd-intoxicated rats, the rats pretreated with SME showed restoration of oxidative balance in the brain tissue. While the expression of brain SOD2, CAT, glutathione peroxidase 1, and GR was down-regulated in the Cd-treated group, the expression of these enzymes was up-regulated in rats pretreated with SME. In addition, administration of SME before CdCl2 increased the Bcl-2 expression, but significantly decreased the expression of Bax. Immunohistochemical analysis showed that compared with Cd-intoxicated rats, rats pretreated with SME showed a decrease in the protein expression of tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α). Our findings indicate that SME protects the brain tissue from Cd-induced neuronal toxicity by improving the antioxidant system and increasing antiapoptotic and anti-inflammatory activities. 

Retracted: No

PubPeer comments:
 Two images in figure 9 appear to overlap. The authors may wish to review this figure carefully, as there may be others. *** ![file] , 
 Dear reader We are very sorry about this mistake and we can not understand how such a mistake has happened. As you mentioned, the figure belonged to the same section but snapped from a different side. Usually, we snap different figures and choose the best one. but it seemed that by mistake we put 2 figures from the same group. We very much apologize. however, this mistake did not affect the reality and integrity of the work and we hope you understand our situation. We kindly ask the editor to let us correct the mistake and replace the figure with a new one. , 
 CORRECTION APRIL 27 2021 This Correction follows an Expression of Concern relating to this article previously published by Portland Press. The authors of the original article u201cProtective effects of Fragaria ananassa methanolic extract in a rat model of cadmium chloride-induced neurotoxicityu201d (Biosci Rep (2018) 38(6), DOI: 10.1042 BSR20180861) would like to correct Figure 9, which had been identified as containing overlapping images in two panels. The authors have stated that the overlapping images had been selected from the same group in error, and further confirm that this error does not affect the conclusions of their study. The correct version of Figure 9 is presented in this Correction. ![file] ,