4.7 Article

Biotransformation of 8:2 polyfluoroalkyl phosphate diester in gilthead bream (Sparus aurata)

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 609, 期 -, 页码 1085-1092

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.07.241

关键词

8:2 diPAP; Gilt-head bream; Dietary exposure; Biotransformation; Tissue distribution

资金

  1. MICINN [CTM2014-56628-C3-1-R]
  2. University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polyfluoroalkyl phosphate esters (PAPs) are high production volume surfactants used in the food contact paper and packaging industry. PAPs may transform to persistent perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCAs) under biotic conditions, but little is known about their fate and behavior in aquatic organisms. Here we report for the first time on the uptake, tissue distribution, and biotransformation of 8:2 polyfluoroalkyl phosphate diester (8:2 diPAP) in fish. Gilt-head bream (Sparus aurata) were dosed via the diet (8:2 diPAP at 29 mu g/g) for 7 days, during which time 8:2 diPAP and its transformation products were monitored in plasma, liver, muscle, gills, bile and brain. 8:2 diPAP tended to accumulate in liver, plasma and gills, and to a lesser extent in muscle, bile and brain. Several transformation products (observed previously in other organisms) were also observed inmost tissues and biofluids, including both saturated and unsaturated fluorotelomer acids (8:2 FTCA, 8:2 FTUCA, 7:3 FTCA), and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). 8:2 FTCA was the major metabolite in all tissues/biofluids, except for bile, where PFOA occurred at the highest concentrations. Unexpectedly high PFOA levels (up to 3.7 ng/g) were also detected in brain. Phase 2 metabolites, which have been reported in fish following exposure to fluorotelomer alcohols, were not observed in these experiments, probably due to their low abundance. Nevertheless, the detection of PFOA indicates that exposure to PAPs may be an indirect route of exposure to PFCAs in fish. (C) 2017 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