Furan is a colourless, volatile, and lipophilic compound which is used as an intermediate product in the synthesis of many chemical and pharmaceutical agents, solvents, lacquers, and resins. Furan has been demonstrated to derive from temperature-degraded/reduced sugars alone by the Maillard reaction, or it may be formed in the presence of temperature-degraded or unaltered amino acids and by the oxidation of ascorbic acid, unsaturated multiple fatty acids, and carotenoids at the appropriate temperature (Fig. 1) (31).
Fig. 1
Different origins of furan (adapted from Perez-Locas and Yaylayan (31))

This chemical and many of its compounds are highly toxic and are associated with serious health effects including cancer, hormonal imbalances, immune system irregularities, and growth rate and behavioural disorders. In addition to these deleterious postnatal effects on human health, another major concern are furan-associated developmental disorders in the foetus (18).
Furan is an important industrial compound primarily used as a solvent and as an intermediate product in the synthesis of other furan-containing chemicals. It is widely available in the environment and has been found in almost all components of the ecosystem, such as air, water, soil, and sediments. This toxic substance quickly accumulates in the food chain and has been detected in a broad variety of foods, particularly coffee, canned meat products, and baby food, with levels exceeding 100 ppb.
A survey of food samples was performed and it was demonstrated that furan occurs at levels > 100 μg/g in a wide range of foods, including wheat, bread, cooked meat products, and roasted coffee (5). It is readily transferred to mammals, accumulates in their fat tissues for many years, passes into the circulating blood as a result of stress or hunger, and continues to have toxic effects (46).
Laboratory studies on animals have shown that furan is highly toxic even at low concentrations (9). Wilson
Furan and its compounds are cytotoxic and cause necrosis in their respective target organs, most frequently in the liver, kidneys, and lungs. These target organs contain cells (hepatocytes, tubule epithelial cells and Clara cells) which express high levels of cytochrome P450 mixed-function oxidase activity. Prior administration of compounds which induce mixed-function oxidase activity markedly increases the severity of target organ necrosis associated with exposure to furan (8).
Oxidative stress exists in a cell or tissue when the concentration of reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated exceeds the antioxidant capability of that cell. Antioxidants have the ability to reduce oxidative damage by either induction or inhibition of key enzyme systems. It is thought that furan can interact with the antioxidant system in cells and tissues and cause free radicals to form. ROS are naturally generated by living organisms. Under normal physiological conditions, there is a balance between the ROS formation rate and enzymatic activities, including catalase (CAT), glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px), glutathione-S-transferase (GST), and superoxide dismutase (SOD). The ROS formation rate is also balanced with the nonenzymatic antioxidants such as glutathione (GSH) and vitamins A, E, and C. Oxidative stress occurs when the balance is impaired due to excessive amounts of ROS generation and/or inadequate antioxidant defence. Lipid peroxidation is the greatest indicator of oxidative stress. Malondialdehyde (MDA) is the best-established and simplest parameter to be tested for determining the extent of lipid peroxidation under oxidative stress conditions, and provides relevant results for clinical practice (47).
Propolis is a sticky and resinous substance collected by honey bees
The aim of this present study was to investigate whether the administration of propolis to rats would display any protective effects against furan-induced hepatotoxicity by means of evaluating biochemically and histopathologically derived data.
Rats were randomly divided into equal six groups: a control group, propolis-treated group (100 mg/kg b.w./day), low-dose furan-treated group (furan-L group, 2 mg/kg b.w./day), high-dose furan treated group (furan-H group, 16 mg/kg b.w./day), furan-L+propolis treated group, and furan-H+propolis treated group. The rats in the control group did not receive any treatment. Furan was administered by gavage for 20 days in the furan-L groups and for 10 days in the furan-H groups. Propolis was given simultaneously with furan administration and was also administered by gavage, in this case for eight days. The doses of propolis and furan used were selected by the precedents in the literature (11, 13).
The MDA level was tested according to the method described by Placer
The effect of propolis supplementation on liver MDA and GSH levels and CAT, GSH-Px, GST, and SOD activities
Control | Propolis | Furan-L | Furan-H | Furan-L+ Prop. | Furan-H+ Prop. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MDA (nmol/g tissue) | 0.62 ± 0.02c | 0.59 ± 0.02c | 0.79 ± 0.04b | 0.90 ± 0.05a | 0.67 ± 0.03c | 0.67 ± 0.01c |
GSH (μmol/ml) | 23.71 ± 0.30a | 23.99 ± 0.21a | 22.48 ± 0.35b | 21.25 ± 0.30c | 23.40 ± 0.24a | 23.39 ± 0.29a |
CAT (k/mg protein) | 0.260 ± 0.02a | 0.241 ± 0.01a | 0.113 ± 0.02b | 0.042 ± 0.01b | 0.234 ± 0.02a | 0.238 ± 0.01a |
GSH-Px (U/g protein) | 48.34 ± 2.83a | 47.44 ± 2.09a | 25.79 ± 2.42b | 29.46 ± 0.82b | 42.27 ± 1.16a | 42.39 ± 2.46a |
GST (U/mg protein) | 23.19 ± 0.84a | 21.05 ± 0.80ab | 14.96 ± 0.84c | 13.87 ± 1.02c | 21.03 ± 0.90ab | 19.97 ± 1.19b |
SOD (U/g protein) | 77.49 ± 0.25a | 77.19 ± 0.31ab | 74.18 ± 0.22c | 73.00 ± 0.58c | 76.10 ± 0.27ab | 75.83 ± 0.81b |
The data are expressed as mean ± SE for seven animals per group. Within rows, means with different letters (a, b, and c) are significantly different (p < 0.001)
The effect of propolis supplementation on plasma AST, ALT, ALP, and LDH activities and cholesterol levels
Control | Propolis | Furan-L | Furan-H | Furan-L+ Prop. | Furan-H+ Prop. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AST (U/L) | 212.66 ± 22.09bc | 192.0 ± 12.49c | 236.00 ± 10.56bc | 639.00 ± 27.71a** | 192.66 ± 20.52c | 261.00 ± 16.74b |
ALT (U/L) | 55.66 ± 2.69c | 52.33 ± 3.65c | 62.00 ± 4.70c | 281.0 ± 3.46a** | 42.33 ± 1.72c | 124.50 ± 4.53b |
ALP (U/L) | 6.66 ± 0.21c | 5.33 ± 0.55c | 7.00 ± 0.80bc | 9.50 ± 0.28a* | 6.00 ± 0.36c | 8.50 ± 0.28ab |
LDH (U/L) | 969.00 ± 143.21b | 804.50 ± 112.87b | 957.50 ± 32.75b | 1647.33 ± 245.63a** | 768.50 ± 101.32b | 1557.50 ± 115.75a |
Cholesterol (mg/dL) | 50.66 ± 0.84 | 47.00 ± 2.19 | 56.75 ± 2.89 | 57.00 ± 1.15 | 45.66 ± 1.87 | 47.00 ± 1.15 |
The data are expressed as mean ± SE for seven animals per group. Within rows, means with different letters (a, b, and c) are significantly different (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.001)
Fig. 2
The livers of furan-treated rats. A

Fig. 3
A

The effect of propolis supplementation on liver histopathological changes
Control | Propolis | Furan-L | Furan-H | Furan-L+ Propolis | Furan-H+ Propolis | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Oval cell proliferation | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.67 ± 0.33b | 3.00 ± 0.0a | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.00 ± 0.0c |
Pseudo-inclusion | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.00 ± 0.0b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 0.33 ± 0.21c | 1.00 ± 0.0b |
Nuclear atypia | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 1.33 ± 0.21a | 1.50 ± 0.22a | 0.33 ± 0.21b | 1.00 ± 0.0a |
Karyomegaly | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.17 ± 0.17ab | 1.50 ± 0.22a | 1.00 ± 0.0b | 1.00 ± 0.0b |
Macrovesicular fatty | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.00 ± 0.37b | 3.00 ± 0.0a | 0.67 ± 0.21b | 1.00 ± 0.0b |
Apoptotic body | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.33 ± 0.21b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 1.00 ± 0.0c | 2.00 ± 0.0a |
Periportal fibrosis | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.33 ± 0.21b | 2.50 ± 0.22a | 1.00 ± 0.0b | 1.00 ± 0.0b |
Pericentral fibrosis | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.33 ± 0.21bc | 0.50 ± 0.22b | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.00 ± 0.0a |
Capsular fibrosis | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.17 ± 0.17b | 1.00 ± 0.45a | 0.33 ± 0.21ab | 1.00 ± 0.0a |
Bile duct proliferation | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.67 ± 0.21b | 3.00 ± 0.0a | 1.00 ± 0.0c | 1.00 ± 0.0c |
Nodule (adenoma) | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.17 ± 0.17ab | 0.50 ± 0.22a | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b |
Sinusoidal congestion | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.50 ± 0.22b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 1.33 ± 0.21bc | 1.00 ± 0.0c |
Periportal cell infiltration | 0.0 ± 0.0e | 0.0 ± 0.0e | 1.50 ± 0.22c | 2.50 ± 0.22a | 1.00 ± 0.0d | 2.00 ± 0.0b |
Single cell necrosis | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.50 ± 0.22b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 0.67 ± 0.21c | 1.00 ± 0.0c |
Bile pigment accumulation | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.00 ± 0.37b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 0.67 ± 0.21b | 1.00 ± 0.0b |
Sinusoidal congestion | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.00 ± 0.0a | 1.00 ± 0.0a | 0.67 ± 0.21b | 1.00 ± 0.0a |
Parenchyma degeneration | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.50 ± 0.22b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 1.33 ± 0.21b | 2.00 ± 0.0a |
Intestinal metaplasia in the bile duct epithelium | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.50 ± 0.24a | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b |
The data are expressed as mean ± SE for seven animals per group. Within rows, means with different letters (a, b, c, d, and e) are significantly different
Besides being manufactured as a major industrial product, furan is generated unintentionally in processed food exposed to heat (canning, pasteurisation, etc.). It has recently been detected in a number of heat-processed food items, including baby food (16). Sprankle
According to the toxicity risk assessment published by EFSA, furan has been reported to be carcinogenic in rats at higher doses, possibly by affecting the genotoxic mechanisms (15). The toxicity and carcinogenicity of furan are mediated by the catalysis of cytochrome P450 (mostly CYP2E1), which is responsible for furan oxidation. Cytochrome P450 inducers aggravate the toxic effects of furan by metabolising it, and consequently furan-induced protein binding, GSH depletion, and cytotoxicity occur. These toxic effects are alleviated in the presence of cytochrome P450 inhibitors (32).
Cordelli
Furan has been reported to be associated with the development of liver tumours, as hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma, in male and female rats at doses of 2, 4, or 8 mg/kg b.w. administered five days a week for two years (29). Male rats treated with 30 mg/kg b.w. of furan for 3 months were reported to develop cholangiofibrosis, which in some cases progressed to tumours after 9 or 15 months without further treatment (28). National Toxicology Program (NTP) studies have shown that a 13-week administration of furan in animals caused weight loss and exerted potentially carcinogenic toxic effects on several organs such as weight increases in the liver, kidneys, and thymus and dose-related liver and kidney lesions. Ploch and Kedderis (34) reported that furan-administered mice developed necrosis in the liver and kidneys. No tumour-inducing effects were reported at doses < 2 mg/kg b.w.
Oxidative stress is a condition that is exacerbated proportionally to the amount of ROS generated in the environment. Overproduction of ROS in relation to furan leads to significant oxidative stress, cellular damage, and necrosis caused by various mechanisms including peroxidation of membrane lipids, protein denaturation, and DNA damage (19). Various studies demonstrate that exposure to furan increases intracellular ROS production and that the consequent biochemical and physiological disorders may be due to the emergent oxidative stress. It has been shown that furan can serve as an oxidant precursor; it reduces the activity levels of several antioxidant enzymes by inducing oxidative stress and increases lipid peroxidation in vital organs (21, 36, 41, 42).
Selmanoğlu
CAT activity was found to decrease in the furan-administered groups in our study, indicating the induction of hepatotoxicity. The decrease in CAT activity causes the generation of hydroxyl radicals (OH·) derived from H2O2. OH· generation in excessive amounts also aggravates oxidative stress. The decrease in CAT activity in the liver tissue may be an adaptive response to increased levels of oxidative stress and may be attributed to interference with antioxidant functions. GSH-Px, an antioxidant enzyme, is one of the first enzymes generated as a line of defence against ROS, and a decrease is observed in its enzyme activities after furan administration. The primary reason for reduced GSH-Px activity in furan-induced oxidative stress is the inhibition of enzymatic activities by ROS. A secondary reason may be ROS binding to proteins and structural changes occurring in their structure, consequently resulting in their oxidation (47).
In the literature, several antioxidants have been investigated for their effects in preventing furan-induced toxicity in different organs and tissues (19, 21, 36, 41, 42). Augmented antioxidant capacity is critical in providing a hepatoprotective effect and counteracts the untoward effects of oxidative stress (35). Our literature review revealed no studies investigating the antioxidant effects of propolis treatment in the furan-induced hepatotoxicity model in rats. Several studies are available, however, in the literature demonstrating these effects on several liver injury models in which the chemical insult was not furan (7, 13, 22). Dicaffeoylquinic acid derivatives in propolis may be responsible for its antioxidative properties and may contribute to its hepatoprotective effects observed in the chemically induced models. Also in immunologically induced models, phenolic compounds in the composition of propolis may be responsible for its antioxidative actions
Propolis as an antioxidant source has recently received considerable attention regarding its clinical effects on thiobarbituric acid reactive substance levels (22, 30). Badr (4) aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effects of propolis water extract on methotrexate-induced liver toxicity in mice. The author demonstrated that the administration of propolis was associated with hepatoprotective effects against the degenerative effects of methotrexate. Bhadauria and Nirala (7) reported that ethanolic propolis extracts prevented liver damage in rats induced by overdoses of acetaminophen. The authors reported that the propolis extract had a healing effect by reversing the acetaminophen-induced changes in blood biochemical parameters, oxidative stress markers, and histopathological findings. Kolankaya
The altered activities of some liver-specific enzymes reflect the effects of cell proliferation, and their metabolic transformations in tumour cells are quite different from normal cells (29). Many researchers have shown that furan administration causes an increase in some liver-specific enzyme activities (29, 37, 43, 49). In this study, furan administration to rats led to a marked elevation in the levels of plasma AST, ALT, ALP, and LDH, which is indicative of hepatocellular damage. This might be due to the possible rapid release of these enzymes from the cytoplasm into the circulatory system after rupture of the plasma membrane and cellular damage.
In conclusion, in our study reduced activities of antioxidant enzymes in furan-treated rats were demonstrated; however, in the group receiving the combination of propolis and furan, the MDA and GSH levels and the activities of the antioxidant enzymes and plasma AST, ALT, ALP, and LDH were found to be close to those observed in the control group. The liver MDA concentrations and improved antioxidant activities indicate that propolis plays a role in reducing oxidative stress and furan-induced damage. This can be explained by the fact that propolis has the ability to prevent oxidative stress and limit the production of free radicals, improving the antioxidant defence system. The increase in the antioxidant enzyme activities following the administration of propolis demonstrates that propolis is protective against furan toxicity and has an antioxidant role. The results also demonstrate that propolis has potential protective effects against furan-induced hepatotoxicity. Currently, more than 150 compounds have been identified in the composition of propolis. Further research is needed to identify whether some or all of its components are involved in preventing atherosclerosis, inducing hepatoprotective effects or scavenging free radicals (30).
Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

The effect of propolis supplementation on liver histopathological changes
Control | Propolis | Furan-L | Furan-H | Furan-L+ Propolis | Furan-H+ Propolis | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Oval cell proliferation | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.67 ± 0.33b | 3.00 ± 0.0a | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.00 ± 0.0c |
Pseudo-inclusion | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.00 ± 0.0b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 0.33 ± 0.21c | 1.00 ± 0.0b |
Nuclear atypia | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 1.33 ± 0.21a | 1.50 ± 0.22a | 0.33 ± 0.21b | 1.00 ± 0.0a |
Karyomegaly | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.17 ± 0.17ab | 1.50 ± 0.22a | 1.00 ± 0.0b | 1.00 ± 0.0b |
Macrovesicular fatty | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.00 ± 0.37b | 3.00 ± 0.0a | 0.67 ± 0.21b | 1.00 ± 0.0b |
Apoptotic body | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.33 ± 0.21b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 1.00 ± 0.0c | 2.00 ± 0.0a |
Periportal fibrosis | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.33 ± 0.21b | 2.50 ± 0.22a | 1.00 ± 0.0b | 1.00 ± 0.0b |
Pericentral fibrosis | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.33 ± 0.21bc | 0.50 ± 0.22b | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.00 ± 0.0a |
Capsular fibrosis | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.17 ± 0.17b | 1.00 ± 0.45a | 0.33 ± 0.21ab | 1.00 ± 0.0a |
Bile duct proliferation | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.67 ± 0.21b | 3.00 ± 0.0a | 1.00 ± 0.0c | 1.00 ± 0.0c |
Nodule (adenoma) | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.17 ± 0.17ab | 0.50 ± 0.22a | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b |
Sinusoidal congestion | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.50 ± 0.22b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 1.33 ± 0.21bc | 1.00 ± 0.0c |
Periportal cell infiltration | 0.0 ± 0.0e | 0.0 ± 0.0e | 1.50 ± 0.22c | 2.50 ± 0.22a | 1.00 ± 0.0d | 2.00 ± 0.0b |
Single cell necrosis | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 0.0 ± 0.0d | 1.50 ± 0.22b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 0.67 ± 0.21c | 1.00 ± 0.0c |
Bile pigment accumulation | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.00 ± 0.37b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 0.67 ± 0.21b | 1.00 ± 0.0b |
Sinusoidal congestion | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.00 ± 0.0a | 1.00 ± 0.0a | 0.67 ± 0.21b | 1.00 ± 0.0a |
Parenchyma degeneration | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 0.0 ± 0.0c | 1.50 ± 0.22b | 2.00 ± 0.0a | 1.33 ± 0.21b | 2.00 ± 0.0a |
Intestinal metaplasia in the bile duct epithelium | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.50 ± 0.24a | 0.0 ± 0.0b | 0.0 ± 0.0b |
The effect of propolis supplementation on liver MDA and GSH levels and CAT, GSH-Px, GST, and SOD activities
Control | Propolis | Furan-L | Furan-H | Furan-L+ Prop. | Furan-H+ Prop. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MDA (nmol/g tissue) | 0.62 ± 0.02c | 0.59 ± 0.02c | 0.79 ± 0.04b | 0.90 ± 0.05a | 0.67 ± 0.03c | 0.67 ± 0.01c |
GSH (μmol/ml) | 23.71 ± 0.30a | 23.99 ± 0.21a | 22.48 ± 0.35b | 21.25 ± 0.30c | 23.40 ± 0.24a | 23.39 ± 0.29a |
CAT (k/mg protein) | 0.260 ± 0.02a | 0.241 ± 0.01a | 0.113 ± 0.02b | 0.042 ± 0.01b | 0.234 ± 0.02a | 0.238 ± 0.01a |
GSH-Px (U/g protein) | 48.34 ± 2.83a | 47.44 ± 2.09a | 25.79 ± 2.42b | 29.46 ± 0.82b | 42.27 ± 1.16a | 42.39 ± 2.46a |
GST (U/mg protein) | 23.19 ± 0.84a | 21.05 ± 0.80ab | 14.96 ± 0.84c | 13.87 ± 1.02c | 21.03 ± 0.90ab | 19.97 ± 1.19b |
SOD (U/g protein) | 77.49 ± 0.25a | 77.19 ± 0.31ab | 74.18 ± 0.22c | 73.00 ± 0.58c | 76.10 ± 0.27ab | 75.83 ± 0.81b |
The effect of propolis supplementation on plasma AST, ALT, ALP, and LDH activities and cholesterol levels
Control | Propolis | Furan-L | Furan-H | Furan-L+ Prop. | Furan-H+ Prop. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AST (U/L) | 212.66 ± 22.09bc | 192.0 ± 12.49c | 236.00 ± 10.56bc | 639.00 ± 27.71a** | 192.66 ± 20.52c | 261.00 ± 16.74b |
ALT (U/L) | 55.66 ± 2.69c | 52.33 ± 3.65c | 62.00 ± 4.70c | 281.0 ± 3.46a** | 42.33 ± 1.72c | 124.50 ± 4.53b |
ALP (U/L) | 6.66 ± 0.21c | 5.33 ± 0.55c | 7.00 ± 0.80bc | 9.50 ± 0.28a* | 6.00 ± 0.36c | 8.50 ± 0.28ab |
LDH (U/L) | 969.00 ± 143.21b | 804.50 ± 112.87b | 957.50 ± 32.75b | 1647.33 ± 245.63a** | 768.50 ± 101.32b | 1557.50 ± 115.75a |
Cholesterol (mg/dL) | 50.66 ± 0.84 | 47.00 ± 2.19 | 56.75 ± 2.89 | 57.00 ± 1.15 | 45.66 ± 1.87 | 47.00 ± 1.15 |
Exercise-induced haematological and blood lactate changes in whippets training for lure coursing Assessment of tuberculosis biomarkers in paratuberculosis-infected cattle Crosstalk between apoptosis and cytotoxic lymphocytes (CTLs) in the course of Lagovirus europaeus GI.1a infection in rabbitsIdentification of honey bee sperm structures following the use of various staining techniques Bacterial and viral rodent-borne infections on poultry farms. An attempt at a systematic review Assessment of selected immunological parameters in dairy cows with naturally occurring mycotoxicosis before and after the application of a mycotoxin deactivator The small non-coding RNA rli106 contributes to the environmental adaptation and pathogenicity ofListeria monocytogenes Serum and milk levels of antibodies to bovine viral diarrhoea virus, bovine herpesvirus-1 and -4, and circulation of different bovine herpesvirus-4 genotypes in dairy cattle with clinical mastitis The role of leukotriene B4 in cow metritis Molecular microbiological characteristics of gingival pockets in the periodontal diseases of dogs The eradication of M. caprae tuberculosis in wild boar (Sus scrofa ) in the Bieszczady Mountains, southern Poland – an administrative perspectiveDesign, synthesis, and evaluation of peptides derived from L1 protein against bovine papillomavirus-1/2 identified along Mexico’s cattle export route Recombinant hexon protein as a new bovine adenovirus type 3 subunit vaccine candidate Adherence of uropathogenic Escherichia coli in dog urine after consumption of food supplemented with cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon )Exchanged communities of abomasal nematodes in cervids with a first report on Mazamastrongylus dagestanica in red deer