4.7 Article

Trace elements in hazardous mineral fibres

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
Volume 216, Issue -, Pages 314-323

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2016.06.007

Keywords

Mineral fibres; Asbestos; Trace elements

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Both occupational and environmental exposure to asbestos-mineral fibres can be associated with lung diseases. The pathogenic effects are related to the dimension, biopersistence and chemical composition of the fibres. In addition to the major mineral elements, mineral fibres contain trace elements and their content may play a role in fibre toxicity. To shed light on the role of trace elements in asbestos carcinogenesis, knowledge on their concentration in asbestos-mineral fibres is mandatory. It is possible that trace elements play a synergetic factor in the pathogenesis of diseases caused by the inhalation of mineral fibres. In this paper, the concentration levels of trace elements from three chrysotile samples, four amphibole asbestos samples (UICC amosite, UICC anthophyllite, UICC crocidolite and tremolite) and fibrous erionite from Jersey, Nevada (USA) were determined using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). For all samples, the following trace elements were measured: Li, Be, Sc, V, Cr, Mn, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, As, Rb, Sr, Y, Sb, Cs, Ba, La, Pb, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, Th, U. Their distribution in the various mineral species is thoroughly discussed. The obtained results indicate that the amount of trace metals such as Mn, Cr, Co, Ni, Cu and Zn is higher in anthophyllite and chrysotile samples, whereas the amount of rare earth elements (REE) is higher in erionite and tremolite samples. The results of this work can be useful to the pathologists and biochemists who use asbestos minerals and fibrous erionite in-vitro studies as positive cyto- and genotoxic standard references. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available