确定海洋环境中新出现的关注污染物(CECs)的多采样策略。

IF 4.4 Q1 TOXICOLOGY
Enrique J Díaz-Montaña, Sofía Domínguez-Gil
{"title":"确定海洋环境中新出现的关注污染物(CECs)的多采样策略。","authors":"Enrique J Díaz-Montaña, Sofía Domínguez-Gil","doi":"10.3390/jox15050149","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The determination of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) in the marine environment is performed through many different sampling approaches. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to compare different existing sampling strategies: biofilm mesocosms, considering micro- and macrofouling; passive sampling; and grab marine water. The sampling of grab water was performed considering spatial and time-line variations. The spatial analysis of CECs showed that three sun agents and caffeine represent the biggest proportion of CECs in the Malaga Mediterranean coastal area, ranging from 0.391 to 0.495 ng/L. The time-line analysis did not show any upward or downward trend in CEC concentration. The mesocosm study comprised a separate evaluation of micro- and macrofouling that showed similar profiles, in which the sun agents presented the highest concentrations. While certain compounds were detected at comparable levels in both fouling types, such as clotrimazole around 0.001 ng/L, others exhibited significant differences in concentration, like caffeine. The passive sampling was also performed, obtaining similar results to those observed in the biofilm mesocosm macrofouling. Finally, all the obtained results from the different samplings were statistically compared, showing that passive sampling presented greater similarities with macrofouling and that there are significant differences between the sampling approach employed.</p>","PeriodicalId":42356,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Xenobiotics","volume":"15 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12452650/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multisampling Strategies for Determining Contaminants of Emerging Concern (CECs) in the Marine Environment.\",\"authors\":\"Enrique J Díaz-Montaña, Sofía Domínguez-Gil\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/jox15050149\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The determination of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) in the marine environment is performed through many different sampling approaches. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to compare different existing sampling strategies: biofilm mesocosms, considering micro- and macrofouling; passive sampling; and grab marine water. The sampling of grab water was performed considering spatial and time-line variations. The spatial analysis of CECs showed that three sun agents and caffeine represent the biggest proportion of CECs in the Malaga Mediterranean coastal area, ranging from 0.391 to 0.495 ng/L. The time-line analysis did not show any upward or downward trend in CEC concentration. The mesocosm study comprised a separate evaluation of micro- and macrofouling that showed similar profiles, in which the sun agents presented the highest concentrations. While certain compounds were detected at comparable levels in both fouling types, such as clotrimazole around 0.001 ng/L, others exhibited significant differences in concentration, like caffeine. The passive sampling was also performed, obtaining similar results to those observed in the biofilm mesocosm macrofouling. Finally, all the obtained results from the different samplings were statistically compared, showing that passive sampling presented greater similarities with macrofouling and that there are significant differences between the sampling approach employed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":42356,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Xenobiotics\",\"volume\":\"15 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12452650/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Xenobiotics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/jox15050149\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"TOXICOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Xenobiotics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jox15050149","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

海洋环境中新出现的污染物(CECs)的测定是通过许多不同的采样方法进行的。因此,本研究的主要目的是比较不同的现有采样策略:考虑微观和宏观污染的生物膜中生态系统;被动采样;拿点海水。考虑了空间和时间的变化,对抓取水进行了采样。CECs的空间分析表明,三种太阳剂和咖啡因在马拉加地中海沿岸地区的CECs中所占比例最大,范围为0.391 ~ 0.495 ng/L。时间线分析显示CEC浓度没有上升或下降的趋势。mesocosmos研究包括对微观和宏观污染的单独评估,显示出相似的概况,其中太阳剂的浓度最高。虽然在两种污染类型中检测到的某些化合物的水平相当,例如在0.001 ng/L左右的克霉唑,但其他化合物的浓度存在显着差异,如咖啡因。被动采样也进行了,获得类似的结果在生物膜介膜宏观污染中观察到。最后,对不同采样的所有结果进行统计比较,表明被动采样与宏观污染的相似性更大,而采用的采样方法之间存在显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Multisampling Strategies for Determining Contaminants of Emerging Concern (CECs) in the Marine Environment.

The determination of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) in the marine environment is performed through many different sampling approaches. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to compare different existing sampling strategies: biofilm mesocosms, considering micro- and macrofouling; passive sampling; and grab marine water. The sampling of grab water was performed considering spatial and time-line variations. The spatial analysis of CECs showed that three sun agents and caffeine represent the biggest proportion of CECs in the Malaga Mediterranean coastal area, ranging from 0.391 to 0.495 ng/L. The time-line analysis did not show any upward or downward trend in CEC concentration. The mesocosm study comprised a separate evaluation of micro- and macrofouling that showed similar profiles, in which the sun agents presented the highest concentrations. While certain compounds were detected at comparable levels in both fouling types, such as clotrimazole around 0.001 ng/L, others exhibited significant differences in concentration, like caffeine. The passive sampling was also performed, obtaining similar results to those observed in the biofilm mesocosm macrofouling. Finally, all the obtained results from the different samplings were statistically compared, showing that passive sampling presented greater similarities with macrofouling and that there are significant differences between the sampling approach employed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
1.70%
发文量
21
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Xenobiotics publishes original studies concerning the beneficial (pharmacology) and detrimental effects (toxicology) of xenobiotics in all organisms. A xenobiotic (“stranger to life”) is defined as a chemical that is not usually found at significant concentrations or expected to reside for long periods in organisms. In addition to man-made chemicals, natural products could also be of interest if they have potent biological properties, special medicinal properties or that a given organism is at risk of exposure in the environment. Topics dealing with abiotic- and biotic-based transformations in various media (xenobiochemistry) and environmental toxicology are also of interest. Areas of interests include the identification of key physical and chemical properties of molecules that predict biological effects and persistence in the environment; the molecular mode of action of xenobiotics; biochemical and physiological interactions leading to change in organism health; pathophysiological interactions of natural and synthetic chemicals; development of biochemical indicators including new “-omics” approaches to identify biomarkers of exposure or effects for xenobiotics.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信