Estimating the proportion of bioaccessible lead (BaPb) in household dust wipe samples: a comparison of IVBA and PBET methods.

IF 1.9 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q4 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
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,&nbsp;Ganga M Hettiarachchi,&nbsp;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":null,"pages":null},"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.

估计家庭灰尘擦拭样品中生物可及性铅(BaPb)的比例:IVBA和PBET方法的比较。
使用标准化湿巾收集和测量家庭灰尘中总铅的既定方法很容易获得,但使用湿巾测量生物可及性铅(BaPb)的方法不太清楚。本研究比较了两种体外估算湿巾灰尘中BaPb比例的方法,包括在两个pH值(1.5和2.5)下,美国环保署的体外生物可及性测定法(IVBA);生理萃取试验(PBET 2.5 pH)。创建了两种类型的模拟家庭粉尘样本(铅污染的土壤和铅污染的油漆),每一种都有三种铅浓度。将等量的模拟粉尘涂于光滑表面,按照标准的EPA粉尘擦拭方案收集,并分析BaPb和总Pb (ASTM-E1644-17, ICP-OES)。不同提取方法估计的BaPb水平差异显著。pbb的平均百分比为IVBA pH 1.5, > 90%(铅涂料)和59-63%(铅土壤);IVBA pH 2.5 78-86%(铅漆)和45-50%(铅土);PBET pH 2.5 56 - 61%(铅涂料)和41-50%铅土壤)。特别是对于含铅涂料污染的粉尘,PBET表现出明显更强的辨别能力,这表明在模拟的家庭粉尘样品中,BaPb值的范围更广,并且更接近于总铅浓度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.80%
发文量
93
审稿时长
3.0 months
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信