4.7 Article

Bioanalytical characterisation of multiple endocrine- and dioxin-like activities in sediments from reference and impacted small rivers

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 158, 期 1, 页码 74-83

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2009.07.041

关键词

River sediment; Endocrine disrupting chemicals; In vitro bioassays; GC-MS & LC-MS analysis; Mass balance analysis

资金

  1. French Ministry of Ecology and Sustainable Development [189]
  2. Agence Francaise de Securite Sanitaire de l'Environnement et du Travail [RD-2005-02]
  3. ANRT
  4. INERIS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A comprehensive evaluation of organic contamination was performed in sediments sampled in two reference and three impacted small streams where endocrine disruptive (ED) effects in fish have been evidenced. The approach combined quantitative chemical analyses of more than 50 ED chemicals (EDCs) and a battery of in vitro bioassays allowing the quantification of receptor-mediated activities, namely estrogen (ER), androgen (AR), dioxin (AhR) and pregnane X (PXR) receptors. At the most impacted sites, chemical analyses showed the presence of natural estrogens, organochlorine pesticides, parabens, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (16 PAHs), bisphenol A and alkylphenols, while synthetic steroids, myco-estrogens and phyto-estrogens were not detected. Determination of toxic-equivalent amounts showed that 28-96% of estrogenic activities in bioassays (0.2-6.3 ng/g 17 beta-estradiol equivalents) were explained by 17 beta-estradiol and estrone. PAHs were major contributors (20-60%) to the total dioxin-like activities. Interestingly, high PXR and (anti)AR activities were detected; however, the targeted analysed compounds could not explain the measured biological activities. This study highlighted the presence of multiple organic EDCs in French river sediments subjected to mixed diffuse pollution, and argues for the need to further identify AR and PXR active compounds in the aquatic environment. (C) 2009 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