Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.29(1) 2020 Genotoxic evaluation for artificial food flavoring additive DOI: https://doi.org/10.31351/vol29iss1pp55-61a 55 Evaluation the Incidence of Genotoxic Effects of Artificial Food Favoring Additives in Bone Marrow Cells and Spleen Cells in Mice Nibras H. Jasem* and Ali F. Hassan **,1 * Ministry of Health and Environment ,Technical Affairs Directorate, , Baghdad, Iraq. ** Departments of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Pharmacy, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq Abstract Genetic material is the most important component of cells because it contains the genetic information; hence any disruption to the structure chromosome of cells could lead to very bad results. Genotoxicity use to evaluate the safety of any chemical compounds on genetic materials. Artificial food flavoring additive are chemical substances to produce specific placebo effects added to foods but impart specific flavor to it. The present study evaluates the genotoxic effect of artificial food flavoring additive on structure of chromosomes at three different concentrations (50%, 100%and 150%) on both bone marrow cells and spleen cells in mice for fourteen successive days. It was found that artificial food flavoring additive at concentration (50% and 100%) show not significant increase in total chromosomal aberration in both bone marrow cells and spleen cells when compare to negative control (p>0.05) meanwhile at concentration 150% it causes a significant increase when compare to negative control (p<0.05) .The results have been showed that artificial food flavoring additive had a genotoxic effect at (50%, 100% and 150%). Keywords: Artificial food flavoring additive, Bone marrow cells, Spleen cells, Genotoxicity, Chromosome بسبب استخدام االضافات المنكهة الصناعية في خاليا تقييم احتمالية حدوث تشوهات كروموسومية نخاع العظم وخاليا الطحال في الفئران 1**,علي فارس حسنو *نبراس حسب هللا جاسم العراق ، دائرة الشؤون التكنولوجية بغدادوزارة الصحة والبيئة، * كلية الصيدلة، جامعة بغداد، العراق، السمومو االدويةفرع ** الخالصة تعتبر المادة الوراثية من اهم مكونات الخلية وذلك الحتوائها على المعلومات الوراثية للخلية ولذا اي تعرض سئ لهذة المادة يكون لة عواقب وخيمة على الخلية . فحص السمية الجينية واحد من اهم الفحوصات التي تستعمل لمعرفة تاثير المواد الكيمائية على الشكل العام تعتبر المنكهات الصناعية واحدة من اكثر المركبات استعماال بالوقت الحالي حيث تضيف نكهة مميزة للطعام بدون التاثير على مات.للكروموسو تم تحضير ثالثة حيث للكروموسوم.خواصة العامة . الهدف من البحث هو معرفة التاثيرات السمية الجينية للمنكهات الصناعية على الشكل العام ( وتم اعطاؤها لمدة اربعة عشر يوما للفئران وفي اليوم الخامس عشر تم %150و %100. %50ختلفة من هذة المنكهات الصناعية )تراكيز م ( %100و%50بتراكيز ) ان االضافات المنكهة وقد أظهرت االنتائج. الجينية.استخالص خاليا نخاع العظم وخاليا الطحال لفحص التاثيرات السمية وان (p>.05)تسبب زيادة غير معنوية للمجموع التكسرات الكوموسومية لخاليا نخاع العظم وخاليا الطحال عند مقارنتها بمحموعة السيطرة السالبة حموعة السيطرة السالبة للمجموع التكسرات الكوموسومية لخاليا نخاع العظم وخاليا الطحال عند مقارنتها بم بسبب زيادة معنوية %150تركيز (p<0.05) .المنكهة الصناعية لديها تاثير سام على المادة الوراثية وان هذي التاثيرات السامة تزداد مع زيادة االضافاتان ان نستنتج وبذلك يمكن التركيز . .لجينية , الكوموسومات الكلمات المفتاحية:االضافات المكنهة الصناعية , خاليا نخاع العظم, خاليا الطحال , السمية ا Introduction Artificial food flavoring additive is chemical substances to produce specific flavor when added to foods (1). In the past, different techniques have been used to preserve foods and make them more desirable by addition different natural compounds. In the present days, there is huge orientation for use different types of food additive to the foods (2). Food additives and their metabolites are subjected to different types of toxicological analysis before marketing (3). A previous study shows that about 75% of the Western diet is made up of different types of processed foods; it has been show that the individual consume 8-10 pounds of food additives per year (4). Unfortunately, the children considered as the higher consumer for the food with these food additive (5). Children are higher consumer for calories compared to adults because their activity is higher as compare to adult (6). Again, the blood-brain barrier, being poorly developed early in life, which in turn affect the blood flow as well as permitting a toxic substance to passively cross into the central nervous system (7). There are very little studies for the evaluation of this compound to the human compared to the animal studies (8-9). Genotoxicity is destruction in the genetic materials within the cell which may lead to bad consequences like mutagenesis or cancer development (10). The DNA in a human cell undergoes several thousand to a million damaging events in every day which most of them are detected by repair system (11). 1Corresponding author E-mail: ali_1371982@yahoo.com Received: 3 / 7 / 2019 Accepted:16 / 9 / 2020 Iraqi Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences https://doi.org/10.31351/vol29iss1pp55-61a mailto:ali_1371982@yahoo.com Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.29(1) 2020 Genotoxic evaluation for artificial food flavoring additive 56 Any DNA mutations inherit if the DNA damage is not repaired by repair system before mitosis (12]. Cell division is a process in all living organisms. During cell division, eukaryotic cell is divided; DNA replication and cell growth take place in a coordinated way to ensure correct division and formation of progeny cells containing intact genomes (13, 14]. At the end of Eukaryotic cells division cycle the cells that generate either another copy of themselves or to generate gametes (sex cells) (15]. Materials and Methods Artificial food flavoring additive has been bought from the Iraqi market. Preparation of solutions for different artificial flavoring additive concentration. Three different concentrations of artificial flavoring additive (16] 1. 50% artificial flavoring additive solution. Prepared by dissolving 50 grams of Artificial flavoring additive in sufficient amount of distilled water to complete the volume to 100 ml of .Then, the solution is mixed by a vortex. 2. 100% artificial flavoring additive solution. Prepared by dissolving 100 grams of Artificial flavoring additive in sufficient amount of distilled water to complete the volume to 100 ml of .Then, the solution is mixed by a vortex. 3. 150% artificial flavoring additive solution. Prepared by dissolving 150 grams of Artificial flavoring additive in sufficient amount of distilled water to complete the volume to 100 ml of .Then the solution is mixed by a vortex. Experimental model Sixty Albino Swiss mice (Mus musculus) were used for two experiments. They were supplied by Animal house of Tikrit University. Their weights were 23-27 gram. They were divided into five groups; each was kept in a separate plastic cage. The animals were maintained at a temperature of 23 – 25°C, and they had free excess to food (standard pellets) and ad libitum of water. The animals were divided into five groups (six mice of each) as follow: Group1: Mice were treated with distilled water. This group was served as negative control the dose was given orally for fourteen successive day days. Group2: Mice were treated with a single dose (20mg/kg) of methotrexate giving intraperitoneally. This group was served as a positive control. Group3: Mice were orally treated with (50%) of artificial food flavoring additive for fourteen successive days. Group4: Mice were orally treated with (100%) of artificial food flavoring additive for fourteen successive days. Group5: Mice were orally treated with (150%) of artificial food flavoring additive for fourteen successive days. The different concentration of artificial food additive was given orally instead of drinking water. Mice were sacrificed by (spinal dislocation). Samples of bone marrow cells and spleen cells were taken and genotoxic analyses were carried out as described later (17]. Evaluation of genotoxicity After fourteen days of treatment, all animals were injected intraperitoneally with 1mg/kg colchicine, and then two hours later they are sacrificed by cervical dislocation. Bone marrow samples were aspirated from the femur bone and processed using aseptic technique and Spleen cells samples for evaluation of mitotic index, but only bone marrow cells have been used for evaluation of micronucleus appearance (18]. Statistical Analysis All the results were expressed as mean± standard deviation (m±STD). The data were analyzed by utilizing a computerized statistical package for the social sciences (Microsoft office excel 2010) program. Unpaired student t-test was performed for each group pair includes a comparison between negative control and tests groups after fourteen days of treatment. P-values< 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. Two factors with no replication ANOVA test have been performed for each group pair includes a comparison between different test groups after fourteen days of treatment. P-values< 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. Results In table (1),in bone marrow cells , artificial food flavoring additive at concentration 50% show not significant increase in total chromosomal aberration , chromosomal break, chromosomal gap and ring chromosome when compared to negative control (p>0.05) the rest individual chromosomal aberration show a significant increase at same concentration when compare to negative control (p<0.05). At concentration 100% artificial food flavoring additive show non-significant increase in total chromosomal aberration, chromosomal break and ring chromosome when compared to negative control(p>0.05) , the rest individual chromosomal aberration show a significant increase at same concentration when compare to negative control (p<0.05).At concentration 150% artificial food flavoring additive show significant increase in all individual and total chromosomal aberration except ring chromosome when compare to negative control (p>0.05). Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.29(1) 2020 Genotoxic evaluation for artificial food flavoring additive 57 Artificial food flavoring additive at concentrations (50% and 100%) show a significant decrease in , chromosomal break, chromosomal gap , chromatid break, chromatid gap , acentric chromosome , dicentric chromosome, when compare to positive control (p<0.05) meanwhile Artificial food flavoring additive at concentration (150%) show non-significant decrease in, chromosomal break, chromosomal gap, chromatid break, chromatid gap , acentric chromosome , dicentric chromosome, when compare to positive control (p>0.05). Artificial food flavoring additive show non-significant decrease in total chromosomal aberration at concentrations (50%, 100% and 150%) when compared to positive control (p>0.05). Artificial food flavoring additive show significant differences in total chromosomal aberration and individual chromosomal aberrations at concentrations (50%, 100% and 150%) when compare between each other (p>0.05). In table (2),in spleen cells , artificial food flavoring additive at concentration 50% show non-significant increase in total chromosomal aberration , acentric chromosome, dicentric chromosomal and ring chromosome when compared to negative control (p>0.05) the rest individual chromosomal aberration show a significant increase at same concentration when compare to negative control (p<0.05). At concentration 100% artificial food flavoring additive show not significant increase in total chromosomal aberration and ring chromosome when compare to negative control (p>0.05) , the rest individual chromosomal aberration show a significant increase at same concentration when compared to negative control (p<0.05).at concentration 150% artificial food flavoring additive show significant increase in all individual and total chromosomal aberration except ring chromosome when compare to negative control (p<0.05). Artificial food flavoring additive at concentrations (50% and 100%) show significant decrease in chromosomal gap , chromatid break, chromatid gap , acentric chromosome and dicentric chromosome, when compare to positive control (p<0.05) meanwhile Artificial food flavoring additive at concentration (150%) show non- significant decrease in individual and total chromosomal aberrations when compare to positive control (p>0.05). Artificial food flavoring additive at three different concentrations show significant differences in all individual and total chromosomal aberration except ring chromosome, chromosomal break and chromosomal gaps when compare among each other’s (p<0.05). Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.29(1) 2020 Genotoxic evaluation for artificial food flavoring additive 58 Table 1. Individual and total chromosomal aberrations in bone marrow cells after exposure to different concentrations of artificial foo d flavoring additive in mice  Data are expressed as mean±S.D; n=6 animals in each group;  *significantly different compared to distilled water (negative control) (P<0.05);  Values with non-identical small letters superscripts (a,b,c) consider significant different when compared with methotrexate (positive control) (P<0.05).  Values with non-identical capital letters superscripts (A,B,C) Significant different when compared between tests groups (P<0.05). Bone marrow cells Chromatid Break Chromatid Gap Deletion Dicentric Chromosome Acentric Chromosome Ring Chromosome Chromosome Breaks Chromosome Gap Total Chromosomal Aberration Distilled Water (Negative control) 0.062± 0.008 0.064± 0.005 0.238 ± 0.027 0.190± 0.012 0.210± 0.007 0.036± 0.011 0.078 ± 0.008 0.056± 0.011 0.934± 0.081 Methotrexate(MTX) (positive control) 20mg/kg 0.196± 0.021*a 0.218± 0.013*a 0.356 ± 0.015 *a 0.612± 0.019*a 0.866± 0.035*a 0.056± 0.017 a 0.130 ± 0.012 *a 0.142± 0.036*a 2.518± 0.273*a Artificial flavoring additive at concentration 50% 0.094± 0.015*Ab 0.094± 0.021*Ab 0.280± 0.022*Ab 0.228± 0.015*Ab 0.244± 0.025*Ab 0.030± 0.020 Ab 0.084 ± 0.015 Ab 0.070± 0.019 Ab 1.14± 0.087 Aa Artificial flavoring additive at concentration 100% 0.106± 0.021*Bc 0.108± 0.016*Bc 0.314± 0.018*Bc 0.296± 0.046*Bc 0.278± 0.026*Bc 0.041± 0.015 Ba 0.090 ± 0.043 Ba 0.100± 0.025*Ba 1.454± 0.100 Ba Artificial flavoring additive at concentration 150% 150mg/kg 0.210± 0.016*Ca 0.236± 0.021*Ca 0.376± 0.017*Ca 0.450± 0.142*Ca 0.798± 0.076*Ca 0.084± 0.043 Ca 0.126 ± 0.025 *Ca 0.126± 0.021*Ca 2.15± 0.088*Ca Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.29(1) 2020 Genotoxic evaluation for artificial food flavoring additive 59 Table 2. Individual and Total chromosomal aberrations in spleen cells after exposure to different concentrations of artificial food flavoring additive in mice . Spleen cells Chromatid Break Chromatid Gap Deletion Dicentric Chromosome Acentric Chromosome Ring Chromosome Chromosome Breaks Chromosome gap Total Chromosomal Aberration Distilled Water (Negative control) 0.046± 0.009 0.062± 0.001 0.210 ± 0.016 0.182± 0.008 0.200± 0.016 0.024± 0.006 0.060 ± 0.012 0.044± 0.011 0.826± 0.077 Methotrexate(MTX) (positive control) 20mg/kg 0.200± 0.016*a 0.198± 0.026*a 0.294 ± 0.027 *a 0.490± 0.016*a 0.752± 0.059*a 0.050± 0.007*a 0.118 ± 0.022 *a 0.134± 0.023*a 2.259± 0.180*a Artificial flavoring additive at concentration 50% 0.072± 0.018*Ab 0.072± 0.008*Ab 0.252± 0.030*Ab 0.192± 0.008 Ab 0.218± 0.008 Ab 0.025± 0.017 Ab 0.078 ± 0.008 *Ab 0.064± 0.013*Ab 0.964± 0.086 Ab Artificial flavoring additive at concentration 100% 0.086± 0.011*Bc 0.094± 0.009*Bc 0.288± 0.013*Ba 0.282± 0.053*Bc 0.270± 0.026*Bc 0.033± 0.016 Aa 0.086 ± 0.052 *Aa 0.088± 0.045 *Aa 1.35± 0.097 Ba Artificial flavoring additive at concentration 150% 150mg/kg 0.202± 0.016*Ca 0.218± 0.013*Ca 0.316± 0.015*Ca 0.430± 0.055*Ca 0.768± 0.072*Ca 0.044± 0.024 Aa 0.104 ± 0.089 *Aa 0.114± 0.021*Aa 1.994± 0.090*Ca  Data are expressed as mean±SD; n=6 animals in each group;  *significantly different compared to distilled water (negative control) (P<0.05);  Values with non-identical small letters superscripts (a,b,c) consider significant different when compared with methotrexate (positive control) (P<0.05).  Values with non-identical capital letters superscripts (A, B, C) Significant different when compared between tests groups (P<0.05). Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.29(1) 2020 Genotoxic evaluation for artificial food flavoring additive 60 Discussion The artificial food additive contains different chemicals substances considered as the major active chemical that responsible for the imparting specific flavor that given, the major active substances are (Monosodium Glutamate, Disodium Inosinate and Disodium Guanylate). Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) is used in the food industry as a flavor enhancer which gives umami taste (19]. A previous studies have examined the toxicity of monosodium glutamate, it have been found that the use of this chemical associated with the induction of oxidative stress in different experimental animals after giving of chronic doses of monosodium glutamate (20]. Glutamic acid has been proposed as one of the amino acids using by the body during gluconeogenesis (21]. Increased influx of substances into the cells has been associated with increase the incidence of oxidative stress (22]. This has been corroborated in more recent reports in which hyperglycemia- induced mitochondrial dysfunction and endoplasmic reticulum stress, promote reactive oxygen species (ROS) accumulation that, in turn, promote cellular damage and contribute to many complications can be development and progression. ROS can directly damage lipids, proteins or DNA and modulate intracellular signaling pathways, such as mitogen-activated protein kinases and redox-sensitive transcription factors causing changes in protein expression and, therefore, irreversible oxidative modifications(23-24]. Hyperglycemia , induced by monosodium glutamate , is also known to increase the incidence of glucose auto- oxidation and labile glycation or intracellular activation of the polyol pathway which in turn it induce an oxidative degradation of the glycated protein which lead to increase of reactive oxygen species formations (25]. Oxidative stress is an imbalance between the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and the antioxidant capacity of the cell. ROS have been classified as harmful by-products of the normal aerobic metabolism process of the mitochondria and the increase of its production associated with large variety of diseases besides these harmful effects, if the production of ROS is under control, it plays physiological roles especially in cell signaling and regulating cell redox homeostasis (26]. One of the most dangerous deleterious effect of ROS is the disruption of cell division by interfering with many cellular components especially the genetic materials, when the body was unable to regulate high levels of ROS leading to many diseases characterized by both neurodegeneration and bone marrow failure as well as cancer (27], other previous finding showed that the overproduction of reactive oxygen species lead to chromosomal instability, which in turn increase the incidence of cancer and aging (28). Disodium Inosinate and Disodium Guanylate, It is typically sold in a 50:50 mixture of the two ribosides. This combination with glutamates which imparts the umami (29].These two chemical substances have been estimated for the ability of induction of chromosomal aberration, the test was achieved in vitro using a Chinese hamster fibroblast cell line they found that both of these compounds cause a chromosomal aberration in these cell lines (30]. Conclusions The results showed that artificial food flavoring additive had a genotoxic effect at (50%, 100% and 150%). References 1. Ismael A, RahiemAA. Effect of saccharin on albino rats’ blood indices and the therapeutic action of vitamins C and E. Hum Exp Toxicol,2011; 30 (2):129-137. 2. Karen L, Graham MW, Dominic PW, Vyvyan HC. Synergistic Interactions between Commonly Used Food Additives in a Developmental Neurotoxicity Test, ToxicolSci 2006;90(1):178–187 3. McCann D, Barrett A, Cooper A, Crumpler D, Dalen L, Grimshaw K, et al. Food additives and hyperactive behavior in 3-year-old and 8/9-year old children in the community: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet, 2007;370 (9598):1560–7. 4. Mukherjee A, Agarwal K, Chakrabarti J. Genotoxicity studies of the food additive ester gum. Food1992;30(7):627- 630. 5. Mukherjee A, Chakrabarti J. In vivo cytogenetic studies on mice exposed to acesulfame-K—A non-nutritive sweetener.Food ChemToxicol 1997; 35(12): 1177-1179 6. Gaby AR. Adverse effects of dietary fructose. Alt Med Rev2005; 10: 2 9 4 -306. 7. Brown RJ, De Benate MA, Rother KI, Artificial sweeteners: a systematic review of metabolic effects in youth.Int J PediatrObes 2010; 5:305-312. 8. Mukhopadhyay KM, Mukherjee A, ChakrabartiJ.In vivo cytogenetic studies on blends of aspartame and acesulfame.Food ChemToxicol 2000; 38(1):75-77. 9. Ashida H, Hashimoto T, Tsuji S, Kanazawa K, Dasno GI. Synergistic effects of food colors on the toxicity of 3-amino- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16352620 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Grimshaw%20K%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=17825405 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1521837 Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.29(1) 2020 Genotoxic evaluation for artificial food flavoring additive 61 1,4-dimethyl-5h-pyrido(4,3-b]indole (Trp- P-1) in primary cultured rat hepatocytes. Journal of nutritional science and vitaminology2000; 46(3):130-136 10. Collado M, Gil J, Efeyan A, Guerra C, Schuhmacher AJ, Barradas M, et al.Tumour biology: senescence in premalignant tumors. Nature 2005; 4(436):642. 11. Chen Z, Trotman LC, Shaffer D, Lin HK, Dotan ZA, Niki M, et al. Crucial role of p53-dependent cellular senescence in suppression of Pten-deficient tumorigenesis. Nature2005; 436:725-730. 12. Niture SK, Velu CS, Smith QR, Bhat GJ, Srivenugopal KS. Increased expression of the MGMT repair protein mediated by cysteine prodrugs and chemopreventative natural products in human lymphocytes and tumor cell lines.Carcinogenesis 2007; 28(2):378-89. 13. Coudreuse D, Nurse P. Driving the cell cycle with a minimal CDK control network. Nature2010; 468:1074–1079. 14. Henley SA, Dick FA. The retinoblastoma family of proteins and their regulatory functions in the mammalian cell division cycle. Cell Div2012; 7: 10. 15. Deweerdt S. Comparative biology: Looking for a master switch. Nature 2012; 492(7427):S10–1. 16. Adams TB, Smith RL.Issues and challenges in the safety evaluation of 26 food flavors. Toxicology Letters2004; 149:209-213 17. Boussema I, Rjiba K, Mnasri N, Moussa A, Bacha H. Genotoxicity evaluation of dimethoate to experimental mice by micronucleus, chromosome aberration tests, and comet assay.Int J Toxicol 2012; 31(1):78-85. 18. Allen J W, Shuler CF, Menders RW, Olatt SA. A simplified technique for in-vivo analysis of sister chromatid exchange using 5-bromodeoxyuridine tablets.Cytogenet, Cell Genet 1977; 18: 231-237 19. Tushar KB, Sanjit KK, Prem KY, Prithwiraj M, Shankar Y, Joshi B. Effects of monosodium glutamate on human health: A systematic review. World Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 2017; 5(5):139-144 20. Onyema OO, Farombi EO, Emerole GO, Ukoha AI, OnyezeGO.Effect of vitamin E on monosodium glutamate-induced hepatoxicity and oxidative stress in rats.Ind J Biochem Biophys2006; 43: 20-4. 21. Singh P, Mann KA, Mangat HK, Kaur G. Prolonged glutamate excitotoxicity effects on mitochondrial antioxidants and antioxidant enzymes. Mol Cell Biochem 2003; 243:139-45. 22. Diniz YS, Fernandes AA, Campos KE, Mani F, Ribas BO, Novelli EL. Toxicity of hypercaloric diet and monosodium glutamate: Oxidative stress and metabolic shifting in hepatic tissue. Food ChemToxicol 2004; 42: 319-25. 23. Koya D, Hayashi K, Kitada M, Kashiwagi A, Kikkawa R, Haneda M. Effects of antioxidants in diabetes-induced oxidative stress in the glomeruli of diabetic rats. J Am SocNephrol 2003; 14:S250-S3. 24. Fiorentino TV, Prioletta A, Zuo P, Folli F. Hyperglycemia-induced oxidative stress and its role in diabetes mellitus related cardiovascular diseases.Curr Pharm Des 2013; 19(32):5695-703 25. Timothy JL, Alicia JJ.Glycation, oxidation, and lipoxidation in the development of the complications of diabetes: a carbonyl stress hypothesis.Diabetes Rev (Alex) 1997; 5(4):365–391. 26. Shihab HM, Sajida HI, Ali FH, Ruaa F. Genotoxic Effect of Ethyl acetate Fraction of Cressacretica on Chromosomal Aberration on Bone Marrow Cells and Spleen Cells in Mice.Int J Pharm Sci Rev Res 2017; 43(2) : 220-223. 27. Ali FH, Mahmood K, Nada N, Intesar T N, Ghaith AB. The cytoprotective activity of aqueous green tea extract against metronidazole and tinidazole genotoxic effect.Asian J Pharm Clin Res 2019;12(1) :428-431. 28. Samper E, Nicholls DG, Melov S. Mitochondrial oxidative stress causes chromosomal instability of mouse embryonic fibroblasts.Aging Cell 2003; 2(5):277-85. 29. Campagnol PC, dos Santos BA, Terra NN,Marise ARP.Lysine, disodium guanylate and disodium inosinate as flavor enhancers in low-sodium fermented sausages.Meat Sci 2012; 91(3):334-8. 30. Ishidate J, Sofuni T, Yoshikawa K, Hayashi M, Nohmi T, Sawada M, et al. Primary mutagenicity screening of food additives currently used in Japan. Food ChemToxicol 1984; 8:623-636. Baghdad Iraqi Journal Pharmaceutical Sciences by bijps is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyrights© 2015 College of Pharmacy - University of Baghdad. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Collado%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079833 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Gil%20J%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079833 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Efeyan%20A%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079833 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Guerra%20C%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079833 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Schuhmacher%20AJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079833 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Barradas%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079833 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16079833 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Chen%20Z%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079851 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Trotman%20LC%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079851 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Shaffer%20D%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079851 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Lin%20HK%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079851 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Dotan%20ZA%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079851 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Niki%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16079851 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Niture%20SK%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16950796 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Velu%20CS%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16950796 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Smith%20QR%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16950796 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Bhat%20GJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16950796 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Srivenugopal%20KS%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16950796 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16950796 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Ayed-Boussema%20I%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=21994239 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Rjiba%20K%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=21994239 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mnasri%20N%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=21994239 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Moussa%20A%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=21994239 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Bacha%20H%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=21994239 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21994239 https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/2133550754_Joshi_B https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Farombi%20EO%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16955747 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Emerole%20GO%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16955747 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Ukoha%20AI%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16955747 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Onyeze%20GO%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16955747 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mann%20KA%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=12619899 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mangat%20HK%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=12619899 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kaur%20G%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=12619899 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Fernandes%20AA%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=14667476 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Campos%20KE%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=14667476 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mani%20F%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=14667476 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Ribas%20BO%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=14667476 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Novelli%20EL%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=14667476 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Hayashi%20K%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=12874441 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kitada%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=12874441 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kashiwagi%20A%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=12874441 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kashiwagi%20A%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=12874441 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kikkawa%20R%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=12874441 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Haneda%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=12874441 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Fiorentino%20TV%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23448484 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Prioletta%20A%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23448484 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Zuo%20P%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23448484 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Folli%20F%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23448484 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23448484 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Lyons%20TJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=26366051 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Jenkins%20AJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=26366051 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Samper%20E%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=14570235 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Nicholls%20DG%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=14570235 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Melov%20S%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=14570235 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14570235 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Campagnol%20PC%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22391056 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=dos%20Santos%20BA%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22391056 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Terra%20NN%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22391056 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Terra%20NN%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22391056 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0309174012000484#! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22391056 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Hayashi%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=6381265 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Nohmi%20T%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=6381265 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Sawada%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=6381265 http://bijps.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/bijps.com http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/