Genotoxicity and carcinogenicity profiles of drugs occasionally vary across species due to species difference in drug metabolic profile. To clarify the effect of species differences in the metabolic profile on micronucleus induction, we conducted an in vitro micronucleus test for seven clastogens (benzo[a]pyrene: BaP, cyclophosphamide monohydrate: CPA coumarin, diclofenac, piroxicam, lansoprazole, and chlorpheniramine) with rat, mouse, monkey, dog, or human liver S9. BaP, CPA, coumarin, diclofenac, piroxicam, and lansoprazole induced micronucleus formation with all species of S9s, whereas chlorpheniramine did not induce micronucleus formation in any of the S9s. BaP and CPA revealed remarkable species differences in micronucleus induction, whereas coumarin, diclofenac, piroxicam, and lansoprazole did not present any differences. Interestingly, the amounts of hydroxy-BaP-epoxides and phosphamide mustard, which might be associated with micronucleus induction by BaP and CPA, respectively, were correlated with the degree of micronucleus induction among the five species. In conclusion, the species difference in micronucleus induction by BaP and CPA was attributable to the differences in the metabolic profiles of these drugs among species. Our results indicate that it is crucial to understand the effect of species differences in the metabolic profile of drug candidates on genotoxicity and carcinogenicity potential and to predict their risk in human.

The metabolomic profiles of rat primary hepatocytes following treatment with rotenone, FCCP, or (+)-usnic acid were determined using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Significant and similar changes in the levels of 283 biochemical metabolites were associated with the three treatments compared with solvent control samples. Overall, the three treatments generated similar global biochemical profiles, with some minor differences associated with rotenone treatment. All three treatments resulted in a shift in energy metabolism as demonstrated by decreased glycogen stores and glycolysis. A reduced antioxidant response was detected in cells following all treatments. In addition, bile acid biosynthesis decreased as a potential consequence of increased oxidative stress by all three treatments. Conversely, rotenone treatment induced a number of changes after 1 hr, which were not detected in FCCP- or (+)-usnic acid-treated samples; these changes were not sustained over time and included increased NAD+ salvage and lysine degradation. In conclusion, these biochemical profiles could provide new insights into the mechanism(s) of mitochondrial toxicity.

In this research, for the purpose of presenting a method for evaluating the efficiency of processing and assembly for reinforcing bar construction in an integrated manner, the work performed by technicians is quantitatively analyzed, and the work time, operation analysis, and labor cost are described. We think that the results of this research can be basic data for improving the efficiency of rebar construction.

Looking at the labor efficiency of the entire manufacturing process, the largest value is wall 4.93 (h / ton). Next, beam (thin) 4.27 (h / ton) is the largest. This is due to the large number of reinforcing bars and the number of tags that are both cut and bent, so it can be inferred that the setup work time is long in both the cutting and bending processes. The labor efficiency of setup is larger for thin reinforcing bars than for thick reinforcing bars. It can be inferred that the reason is that the thin reinforcing bars have a larger number of reinforcing bars and the number of tags for both cutting and bending, and the setup work time is longer in both the cutting and bending processes.

The efficiency is 0.8 (man-day / ton) for the beam, followed by 1.6 (man-day / ton) for the slab. The construction time of the beam is about 2.6 times that of the wall, and the efficiency is 0.8 the beam, which is about 2.2 times more efficient than the wall. Although it takes a long time to assemble the beam due to associated work such as distribution of reinforcing bars and movement of equipment, the weight per reinforcing bar is heavy, so the numerical value on the efficiency is evaluated efficiently. On the other hand, in the assembly of thin reinforcing bars such as walls and floors, the efficiency of numerical values on the efficiency is evaluated low despite the large proportion of main work.

The working time is 1/3 to 1/5 of the construction work, and the time per weight is about twice that of beams and columns for walls and floors. Based on these results, it is possible to point out the effectiveness of prefabrication at the manufacturing stage in order to improve the construction efficiency of walls and floors. For floors, increasing construction efficiency leads to a reduction in the number of temporary workers who are called as support, so it is thought that the effect of passing on the work time to the manufacturing stage is great. However, since it is expected that temporary storage and transportation efficiency will become issues, the need for technological development in these areas can be presented as an issue.

As a result of comparing the working hours per weight for each part, it was clarified that the distribution in manufacturing and the distribution in on-site construction site are different, and that improving the efficiency of thin reinforcing bars is a common issue in manufacturing and assembly. Since the instructions for manufacturing are based on the foreman's rebar list, the efficiency of the rebar construction may be affected by the foreman's ability to supervise the entire manufacturing and assembly. How to evaluate the integrated efficiency of such a single project and the efficiency of parallel manufacturing of multiple projects in a manufacturing plant is a future issue.