4.6 Review

Toxicity, arsenic speciation and characteristics of hyphenated techniques used for arsenic determination in vegetables. A review

期刊

RSC ADVANCES
卷 13, 期 44, 页码 30959-30977

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d3ra05770d

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The speciation of arsenic is important due to its varying toxicity depending on its chemical form. Long-term exposure to arsenic can have severe health effects. Various methods and techniques have been developed to identify arsenic species in vegetation samples, including extraction, separation, and detection techniques.
Arsenic (As) speciation is an interesting topic because it is well recognized that the toxicity of this metalloid ultimately depends on its chemical form. More than 300 arsenicals exist naturally. However, As can be present in four oxidation states: As-III, As0, AsIII and AsV. Long-term exposure to As from different sources, such as anthropogenic processes, or water, fauna and flora contaminated with As, has put human health at risk for decades. There are many side-effects correlated with exposure to InAs species, such as skin problems, respiratory diseases, kidney problems, cardiovascular diseases and even cancer. There are different levels and types of As in foods, particularly in vegetables. Furthermore, different chemical methods and techniques have been developed. Therefore, this review focuses on the general properties of various approaches used to identify As species in vegetation samples published worldwide. This includes various approaches (different solvents and techniques) used to extract As species from the matrix. Then, versatile chromatographic and non-chromatographic systems to separate different forms of As are reviewed. Finally, the general properties of the most common instruments used to detect As species from samples of interest are listed. Arsenic (As) speciation is an interesting topic because it is well recognized that the toxicity of this metalloid ultimately depends on its chemical form.

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

4.6
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