4.7 Article

Particle-Bound Mercury Characterization in the Central Italian Herbarium of the Natural History Museum of the University of Florence (Italy)

期刊

TOXICS
卷 9, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/toxics9060141

关键词

mercury; trace elements; particulate matter; indoor air quality; pollution; museum

资金

  1. Fondazione Ente Cassa Risparmio di Firenze [2019.0702]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study evaluated PBM pollution in the Central Italian Herbarium, finding that PBM is mostly fine particulate with Hg primarily bound to sulfur. It suggests potential health risks for workers mainly through oral ingestion exposure to multiple pathways of Hg.
Museums air quality can be negatively affected by treatments with heavy metals compounds employed to prevent pest infestations. Among these, the past use of mercury dichloride (HgCl2) on herbaria artifacts currently produces high levels of indoor atmospheric gaseous mercury (Hg-0) and possibly of particulate bound Hg (PBM), i.e., the particulate matter containing Hg. This study evaluates the PBM pollution in the Central Italian Herbarium (Natural History Museum of the University of Florence, Italy), characterizing the size range and chemical speciation with SEM-EDS microanalysis. The analysis of the total Hg concentration in the samples allowed to calculate the workers exposure risk to this pollutant. PBM is almost totally classifiable as fine particulate with a significant dimensional increase in a period of scarce attendance of the Herbarium rooms. The microanalysis indicates that Hg is essentially bound to S, highlighting the change of Hg speciation from the original association with Cl. The average Hg concentration reveals a potential health risk for workers as result of multiple Hg exposure pathways, mainly by ingestion. The study provides information for characterizing PBM pollution that could affect a workplace atmosphere and a useful basis to evaluate and correctly design solution strategies to reduce the contamination levels and protect workers' health.

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