4.7 Article

Confirmation of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) distribution in the blood and verification of simple quantitative method for PCBs based on specific congeners

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 82, 期 1, 页码 107-113

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.09.061

关键词

Polychlorinated biphenyls; Whole blood; Blood cell; Plasma; Main congener

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We measured the concentration of each polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congener in whole blood, plasma and blood cells, and investigated the distribution of PCBs in human blood using high-resolution gas chromatography/high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRGC/HRMS). The PCB concentrations in plasma and whole blood in terms of lipid concentrations were almost equal, with a correlation coefficient of r = 0.972. In the blood, the ratio of PCBs in blood cells to those in plasma was generally about 1:9 and the congener distribution patterns in blood cells and plasma were similar. We performed verification of a simple mass screening method by obtaining information on the main PCB congeners for investigations on human accumulation and exposure. The total concentration of the seven PCB congeners (UNEP-7) proposed to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) by Muir and Morita was about 50% of the total concentration of all PCB congeners, and UNEP-30 was about 80%. The seven main congeners in the blood (MCB-7) showed a value that was about 60%, and MCB-30 showed a value that was about 90%. Determinations with the main congeners in the blood showed a correlation of r = 0.990 or more between the main eight congeners (MCB-7 plus #74) and the total PCB concentration for all congeners. The results suggest that, although total PCB concentration can be effectively estimated from the main seven congeners, the main eight congeners would be preferable, and that the use of these congeners in the simple mass screening method would be effective for populations in areas uncontaminated by PCBs. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. 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