4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Importance of black carbon in distribution and bioaccumulation models of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in contaminated marine sediments

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY
卷 23, 期 11, 页码 2578-2586

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1897/03-358

关键词

equilibrium partitioning; polychaetes; black carbon; partition coefficients

资金

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [ES00002, 5 P42 ES05947] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The roles and relative importance of nonpyrogenic organic carbon (NPOC) and black carbon (BC) as binding phases of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were assessed by their ability to estimate pore water concentrations and biological uptake in various marine sediments. Sediment bioaccumulation tests were performed with the marine polychaete Nereis virens, using a polyethylene device to estimate pore water concentrations of PAHs. Using existing partitioning data for pyrene and phenanthrene, it was found that the traditional Equilibrium Partitioning model, which assumes all organic carbon is NPOC (EqP(OC)), overestimated the measured pore water concentrations in the test sediments by one to three orders of magnitude. Instead, the measured pore water concentrations were better predicted from a distribution scenario that uses both BC and NPOC (EqP(NPOC,BC)). When comparing actual worm body burdens of pyrene and phenanthrene with the two model estimates of worm tissue concentrations, the EqP(OC) model tended to overestimate actual body burdens by three orders of magnitude, while the EqP(NPOC,BC) model came much closer to the true body burden values. The observed distribution of PAHs in the test sediments was used to calculate BC partition coefficients for five PAHs, which were one to two orders of magnitude higher than their corresponding organic carbon-normalized distribution coefficients, or K(OC)s. Together, these results suggest that, in certain situations, adding black carbon to distribution models may be necessary to predict accurately the bioavailability of PAHs.

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

4.5
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