4.5 Article

The role of desorption for describing the bioavailability of select polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon and polychlorinated biphenyl congeners for seven laboratory-spiked sediments

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY
卷 23, 期 8, 页码 1842-1851

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1897/03-474

关键词

desorption; sediment; polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; polychlorinated biphenyls; bioavailability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lumbriculus variegatus and Diporeia spp. were exposed to two contaminant pairs H-3-benzo[a]pyrene (BaP) and C-14-2,4,5,2'4',5'-hexachlorobiphenyl (HCBP), and H-3-pyrene (PY) and C-14-3,4,3',4'-tetrachlorobiphenyl (TCBP) sorbed to each of seven field-collected sediments of varying composition. Toxicokinetic coefficients, bioaccumulation factors (BAF), and biota-sediment accumulation factors ([BSAF], BAF normalized to the organism lipid content and sediment organic carbon content) were determined. The contaminant desorption rates from sediments were measured with a Tenax resin extraction technique. The desorption rate constants for rapid, slow, and very slow contaminant compartments and the fractions of contaminant in each compartment were compared with the toxicokinetic coefficients, BAF and BSAF to describe contaminant behavior across sediments, among compounds, and between species. The best description of the bioavailability was the log BSAF regressed against the fraction rapidly desorbed (F-rapid) across all sediments and compounds for both species, r(2) = 0.67 and 0.66 for L. variegatus and Diporeia, respectively. Use of a calculated fraction desorbed in 6 h or 24 h, which has been suggested as a surrogate for F-rapid, did not produce as predictive a regression because of uneven desorption in a fixed duration for each compound among the sediments. Thus, F-rapid, provided a good surrogate for the bioavailability of the sediment-sorbed contaminant as represented by BSAF across seven sediments and four compounds with predictions within a factor of approximately two of the measured value.

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