4.7 Article

Bioaccumulation and bound-residue formation of 14C-decabromodiphenyl ether in an earthworm-soil system

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 321, 期 -, 页码 591-599

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.09.041

关键词

Decabromodiphenyl ether; Bound residue; Geophagous earthworm; Soil; Risk assessment

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21207113, 21577120]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Decabromodiphenyl ether (DecaBDE) is one of the most frequently detected flame retardants in terrestrial environments. However, the fate of DecaBDE and its transport in an earthworm-soil system with and without a DecaBDE-degrading strain have rarely been evaluated. In this study, C-14-DecaBDE was self-synthesized, and a DBDE-degrading strain, Rhodococcus erythropolis, was used in an earthworm-soil system. DecaBDE showed limited degradation and mineralization after 35 days of all treatments. The bound-residue (BR) formation in soil was <2.5% in the system containing earthworms, which was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than that observed in the absence of earthworms (<0.45%). DecaBDE could be adsorbed by the earthworms with a BSAF of <0.31. The distribution of C-14-DecaBDE concentrations in the earthworm roughly followed the pattern of crop gizzard > digestive system > head > tail >body wall, suggesting that DecaBDE was mainly uptaken through ingestion. Up to 31% of the C-14-DecaBDE in the earthworms was not extractable, revealing that the total concentration of accumulated C-14-DecaBDE was underestimated. The results also showed that the presence of DecaBDE-degrading bacteria did not significantly affect the fate of DecaBDE and its accumulation in earthworms. The study indicates that the conventional assessment of the bioaccumulation and ecological effects of DecaBDE, which is based only on extractable concentrations, may underestimate the risks. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. 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