4.8 Article

Partition of Environmental Chemicals between Maternal and Fetal Blood and Tissues

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 45, 期 3, 页码 1121-1126

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es1019614

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [ES012199]
  2. Danish Environmental Protection Agency
  3. Danish Council for Strategic Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Passage of environmental chemicals across the placenta has important toxicological consequences, as well as for choosing samples for analysis and for interpreting the results. To obtain systematic data, we collected in 2000 maternal and cord blood, cord tissue, placenta, and milk in connection with births in the Faroe Islands, where exposures to marine contaminants is increased. In 15 sample sets, we measured a total of 87 environmental chemicals, almost all of which were detected both in maternal and fetal tissues. The maternal serum lipid-based concentrations of organohalogen compounds averaged 1.7 times those of cord serum, 2.8 times those of cord tissue and placenta, and 0.7 those of milk. For organohalogen compounds detectable in all matrices, a high degree of correlation between concentrations in maternal serum and the other tissues investigated was generally observed (r(2) > 0.5). Greater degree of chlorination resulted in lower transfer from maternal serum into milk. Concentrations of pentachlor-benzene, gamma-hexachlorocyclohexane, and several polychlorinated biphenyl congeners with low chlorination were higher in fetal samples and showed poor correlation with maternal levels. Perfluorinated compounds occurred in lower concentrations in cord serum than in maternal serum. Cadmium, lead, mercury, and selenium were all detected in fetal samples, but only mercury showed close correlations among concentrations in different matrices. Although the environmental chemicals examined pass through the placenta and are excreted into milk, partitions between maternal and fetal samples are not uniform.

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

4.8
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