4.7 Article

Survey of persistent organochlorine contaminants (PCBs, PCDD/Fs, and PAHs), heavy metals (Cu, Cd, Zn, Pb, and Hg), and arsenic in food samples from Huelva (Spain):: Levels and health implications

期刊

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 52, 期 4, 页码 992-1001

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jf030453y

关键词

PCBs; PCDD/Fs; heavy metals; PAHs; daily intake

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Concentrations of PCBs, PCDDs, and PCDFs, heavy metals (Cu, Cd, Zn, Pb, and Hg), and arsenic have been determined in a great variety of food samples purchased in different markets across the city of Huelva, located in southwestern Spain and under strong industrial activity. All samples analyzed presented concentrations below the maximum allowed by the European Community regarding PCDD/Fs, with the exception of samples within the meat group. An estimation of the daily intake resulted in 1.15 pg of WHOPCDD/Fs-TEQ/kg of body weight/day for a 70 kg person and 2.63 pg of WHO-TEQ/kg of body weight/day when PCBs were included, therefore accounting for a similar or even higher percentage than PCDD/Fs and showing the importance of their inclusion in monitoring studies. Meat and meat products, together with vegetable oils and dairy products, were the major food groups contributing to the estimated daily intake. For heavy metals and arsenic, the concentrations found were under the value proposed by European regulations, and estimated daily intakes were well below those proposed by the WHO for all metals investigated. PAHs have been analyzed in food samples from marine origin, values ranging from 8.22 to 71.4 ng/g of fresh weight. Pyrene was the most abundant compound, accounting for >80% in the samples investigated. The most carcinogenic PAHs, such as benzo[a]pyrene and dibenz[a,h]anthracene, were in all cases below the limits of detection. Therefore, the-samples analyzed in this survey can be considered as safe with regard to the levels obtained and the in-force legislation.

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