4.8 Article

Profiles of urinary neonicotinoids and dialkylphosphates in populations in nine countries

Journal

ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL
Volume 145, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2020.106120

Keywords

Neonicotinoid; Organophosphate; Metabolite; Chlorpyrifos; Urine; Biomonitoring

Funding

  1. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) of the NIH [U2CES026542-02]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The application of neonicotinoid insecticides (neonics) has increased dramatically as a replacement for organophosphate pesticides (OPs) in recent years. Nevertheless, little is known about human exposure to these pesticides in various countries. In this study, concentrations of 14 neonics and six dialkylphosphate metabolites (DAPs) were determined simultaneously in 566 urine samples collected from nine countries during 2010-2014. The highest sum concentration of 14 neonics was found in urine from Vietnam (median: 12.2 ng/mL) whereas that of six DAPs was from China (18.4 ng/mL). The median concentrations of S6 DAPs were twice higher than those of S14 neonics across the nine countries, which suggested a greater exposure to OPs than neonics. The overall pattern of urinary pesticide concentrations was similar among the nine countries with dimethylphosphate (DMP) and dimethylthiophosphate (DMTP) accounting for 51-89% of the total pesticide concentrations. Differences in urinary pesticide concentrations between genders (female and male), age groups (=20, 21-49, and =50 years), and regions (cities of Shanghai, Guangzhou and Qiqihar) were examined. Total daily exposure doses to OPs were highest in China (515 mu g/day) with 15% of the samples exceeding the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's reference dose for chlorpyrifos (18 mu g/day). This is the first study to establish baseline levels of OP and neonics exposure in general populations across nine countries.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available