4.7 Article

Concentration of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in household dust from various countries

Journal

CHEMOSPHERE
Volume 73, Issue 1, Pages S131-S136

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.08.075

Keywords

polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs); dust; indoor environment; human exposure

Funding

  1. National Research Center for Environmental Toxicology (EnTox)
  2. Queensland Health

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Seven polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) congeners were measured in the particulate fraction (<2 mm) of household dust samples (n = 40), collected in four different countries (Australia, Germany, Great Britain, and United States). Dust samples from Germany contained the lowest concentrations of total PBDEs (median: 74 ng/g, range: 17-550 ng/g dust). Australian dust contained the second lowest concentration (median: 1200 ng/g, range: 500-13,000 ng/g dust). The dust from the United States and Great Britain contained the highest measured amounts of total PBDEs (US median: 4200 ng/g dust, range: 520-29,000 ng/g; Great Britain median: 10,000 ng/g, range: 950-54,000 ng/g). Daily intake of PBDEs has been estimated from published reference values on daily dust intake rates. The highest daily intake of 2,21,4,4'-tetrabromodiphenyl ether (BDE-47) found was in the United States (< 1-330 ng/day) and the lowest was in Germany (<1-2 ng/day). The PBDE congeners present in commercially available pentabromodiphenyl ether were the highest in concentration in the United States, and the congener distribution was similar to that of the technical preparation (i.e., 2,2',4,4',5-pentabromodiphenyl ether [BDE-99] was similar in concentration to that of BDE-47). We conclude that further studies are required to investigate human indoor exposure to PBDEs across countries and to determine the risk factors related to indoor design factors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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