4.5 Article

MODELED METHYLMERCURY EXPOSURE AND RISK FROM RICE CONSUMPTION FOR VULNERABLE POPULATIONS IN A TRADITIONAL FISH-EATING AREA IN CHINA

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY
Volume 34, Issue 5, Pages 1161-1168

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/etc.2888

Keywords

Rice; MeHg levels; Human exposure; Risk assessment; Vulnerable populations

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41130535, 41471403]
  2. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2012AA062802]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The circulation of rice from contaminated areas could escalate exposure risk from a local problem to a national issue and affect a wider population beyond the region of origin, as confirmed by the Poison Rice Incident in May 2013 in Guangzhou, China. In the present study, the authors established a food chain model based on the aquivalence method to identify major sources of methylmercury (MeHg), estimate the levels of MeHg, and quantify exposure to MeHg via rice and aquatic food consumption. Different types of organism samples from the Haihe River also were collected to verify the calculated values. The MeHg intake in pregnant women was 1529.1ng/d from the aquatic food chain and as high as 2804.0ng/d from rice, although the intake varied among scenarios. The maximum possible MeHg concentration in the blood of pregnant women was 5.21 mu g/L, higher than the threshold value of MeHg recommended by the US Environmental Protection Agency (4.4 mu g/L), which indicated that pregnant women could face risk from MeHg exposure. The authors also assessed the risk of MeHg exposure in pregnant women and their breastfed infants using a new index, HQ(Equivalent). In 4 scenarios, the HQ(Equivalent) indices ranged from 0.42 to 1.18 for pregnant women and from 0.29 to 0.83 for breastfed infants. Environ Toxicol Chem 2015;34:1161-1168. (c) 2014 SETAC

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available