4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Occurrence of hexabromocyclododecanes and tetrabromobisphenol A in fish and seafood from the sea of Sardinia - FAO 37.1.3 area: Their impact on human health within the European Union marine framework strategy directive

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 228, 期 -, 页码 249-257

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.04.046

关键词

-

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of Health [IZS 05/14R]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Levels of hexabromocyclododecane isomers alpha, beta, gamma, (HBCDDs) and tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBP-A) were determined in 24 representative samples of different wild fish and seafood species (benthic: N = 16; pelagic: N = 8) and 16 samples of farmed bivalve molluscs from the West Mediterranean Sea (FAO 37, 1.3 sub-area). An LC-MS/MS-based method with limits of quantification (LOQS) in the range of 0.01-0.05 ng g(-1) fresh weight (fw) was utilized. While a HBCDD was found in 80% of the 24 wild species samples, beta and gamma congeners were found in 33% and 25%, respectively. Sigma HBCDD content ranged from 0.03 (Aristeus antennatus) to 0.68 (Sardina pilchardus) ng g(-1), fw as Upper Bound values across 2.00-4.46 trophic levels. In farmed molluscs, HBCDD congeners were always present and ranged from 0.22-0.52 ng g(-1) fw, with the exception of one farm (1.23-2.06 ng g(-1) fw), whose values suggest the presence of a regular emission source. TBBP-A levels always fell below the LOQ of 0.05 ng g(-1) fw in all samples. The results are in good agreement with results of previous studies from the Mediterranean Sea. The Environmental Quality Standard for human health from fish and seafood local consumption was set at 165 mu g g(-1) fw. The Margin of Exposure of 490,020 as the ratio between the considered Health Based Guidance Level of 0.79 mg kg(-1) body weight and the geo-referenced HBCDD intake (P95 fish and seafood intake; mean Sigma HBCDD contamination) indicates no threat to food safety. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据