4.6 Article

Assessment of cyclic volatile methyl siloxanes (CVMSs) in indoor dust from different micro-environments in northern and central Vietnam

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL GEOCHEMISTRY AND HEALTH
Volume 45, Issue 5, Pages 1711-1722

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10653-022-01298-6

Keywords

Cyclic volatile methyl siloxanes; Settled dust; Urban area; Waste processing area; Human exposure

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Comprehensive studies on volatile methyl siloxanes in settled dust from various micro-environments in Vietnam revealed that informal waste processing activities are a major source of these emerging contaminants. Among the studied cyclic volatile methyl siloxanes, D5 was found to be the most predominant compound.
Comprehensive studies on emerging contaminants like volatile methyl siloxanes in settled dust from different micro-environments are still limited. In this study, concentrations and distribution of cyclic volatile methyl siloxanes (CVMSs) including D3, D4, D5, and D6 were examined in indoor dust samples collected from various micro-environments in northern and central Vietnam. Concentrations of total CVMSs in the dust samples ranged from 86.0 to 5890 (median 755) ng/g and decreased in the order: waste processing workshops (median 1560; range 329-5890) > common houses (650; 115-1680) > university classrooms (480; 86.0-1540) > vehicle repair shops (295; 126-1950) ng/g. This observation suggests that informal waste processing activities are sources of CVMSs. Among the studied CVMSs, D5 was the most predominant compound (41 +/- 14%), followed by D6 (26 +/- 13%), D4 (23 +/- 12%), and D3 (11 +/- 11%). Moderate positive correlations between D3/D4, D4/D5, and D5/D6 were found. Median daily intake doses of D3, D4, D5, and D6 through dust ingestion were 0.016, 0.051, 0.11, and 0.054 ng/kg/d, respectively, which were comparable to water consumption and markedly lower than the air inhalation pathway.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available