Chandima Wekumbura, Ganga M Hettiarachchi, Christina Sobin
{"title":"Estimating the proportion of bioaccessible lead (BaPb) in household dust wipe samples: a comparison of IVBA and PBET methods.","authors":"Chandima Wekumbura, Ganga M Hettiarachchi, Christina Sobin","doi":"10.1080/10934529.2023.2178206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Established methods for using standardized dust wipes to collect and measure total lead in household dust are readily available but the use of dust wipes to measure bioaccessible lead (BaPb) is less clear. This study compared two in vitro methods for estimating the proportion of BaPb in dust collected into dust wipes including the US-EPA's <i>in-vitro</i> bioaccessible assay (IVBA) method at two pH (1.5 and 2.5) values; and the physiologically based extraction test (PBET 2.5 pH). Two types of simulated household dust samples (Pb-soil contaminated and Pb-paint contaminated) each with three Pb concentrations were created. Equal amounts of simulated dust were applied to a smooth surface and collected following the standard EPA dust wipe protocol and were analyzed for BaPb and total Pb (ASTM-E1644-17, ICP-OES). Estimated BaPb levels differed significantly by the method of extraction. Mean percent BaPb were IVBA pH 1.5, > 90% (Pb-paint) and 59-63% (Pb-soil); IVBA pH 2.5 78-86% (Pb-paint) and 45-50% (Pb-soil); PBET pH 2.5 56 to 61% (Pb-paint) and 41-50% Pb-soil). Particularly for lead-paint contaminated dust, PBET showed significantly greater discrimination as suggested by the broader range of BaPb values and closer approximation to total lead concentrations in simulated household dust samples.</p>","PeriodicalId":15671,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part A-toxic\\/hazardous Substances & Environmental Engineering","volume":"58 2","pages":"127-138"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part A-toxic\\/hazardous Substances & Environmental Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10934529.2023.2178206","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Established methods for using standardized dust wipes to collect and measure total lead in household dust are readily available but the use of dust wipes to measure bioaccessible lead (BaPb) is less clear. This study compared two in vitro methods for estimating the proportion of BaPb in dust collected into dust wipes including the US-EPA's in-vitro bioaccessible assay (IVBA) method at two pH (1.5 and 2.5) values; and the physiologically based extraction test (PBET 2.5 pH). Two types of simulated household dust samples (Pb-soil contaminated and Pb-paint contaminated) each with three Pb concentrations were created. Equal amounts of simulated dust were applied to a smooth surface and collected following the standard EPA dust wipe protocol and were analyzed for BaPb and total Pb (ASTM-E1644-17, ICP-OES). Estimated BaPb levels differed significantly by the method of extraction. Mean percent BaPb were IVBA pH 1.5, > 90% (Pb-paint) and 59-63% (Pb-soil); IVBA pH 2.5 78-86% (Pb-paint) and 45-50% (Pb-soil); PBET pH 2.5 56 to 61% (Pb-paint) and 41-50% Pb-soil). Particularly for lead-paint contaminated dust, PBET showed significantly greater discrimination as suggested by the broader range of BaPb values and closer approximation to total lead concentrations in simulated household dust samples.
期刊介绍:
14 issues per year
Abstracted/indexed in: BioSciences Information Service of Biological Abstracts (BIOSIS), CAB ABSTRACTS, CEABA, Chemical Abstracts & Chemical Safety NewsBase, Current Contents/Agriculture, Biology, and Environmental Sciences, Elsevier BIOBASE/Current Awareness in Biological Sciences, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, Engineering Index/COMPENDEX PLUS, Environment Abstracts, Environmental Periodicals Bibliography & INIST-Pascal/CNRS, National Agriculture Library-AGRICOLA, NIOSHTIC & Pollution Abstracts, PubSCIENCE, Reference Update, Research Alert & Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), Water Resources Abstracts and Index Medicus/MEDLINE.