Diffusive sampling of methyl isocyanate using 4-nitro-7-piperazinobenzo-2-oxa-1,3-diazole (NBDPZ) as derivatizing agent

A diffusive sampling method for the determination of methyl isocyanate (MIC) in air is introduced. MIC is collected using a glass fiber filter impregnated with 4-nitro-7-piperazinobenzo-2-oxa-1,3-diazole (NBDPZ). The urea derivative formed is desorbed from the filter with acetonitrile and analyzed by means of high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) using fluorescence detection (FLD) with lambdaex = 471 nm and lambdaex = 540 nm. Additionally, a method was developed using tandem mass spectrometric (MS-MS) detection, which was performed as selected reaction monitoring (SRM) on the transition [MIC-NBDPZ + H]+ (m/z 307) to [NBDPZ + H]+ (m/z 250). The diffusive sampler was tested with MIC concentrations between 1 and 35 microg m(-3). The sampling periods varied from 15 min to 8 h, and the relative humidity (RH) was set from 20% up to 80%. The sampling rate for all 15 min experiments was determined to be 15.0 mL min(-1) (using HPLC-FLD) with a relative standard deviation of 9.9% for 56 experiments. At 80% RH, only 15 min sampling gave acceptable results. Further experiments revealed that humidity did not affect the MIC derivative but the reagent on the filter prior to and during sampling. The sampling rate for all experiments (including long term sampling) performed at 20% RH was found to be 15.0 mL min(-1) with a relative standard deviation of 6.3% (N = 42). The limit of quantification was 3 microg m(-3) (LC-MS-MS: 1.3 microg m(-3)) for 15 min sampling periods and 0.2 microg m(-3) (LC-MS-MS: 0.15 microg m(-3)) for 8 h sampling runs applying fluorescence detection.     

An Evaluation of Selenium Concentrations in Water, Sediment, Invertebrates, and Fish from the Republican River Basin: 1997–1999

The Republican River Basin of Colorado,Nebraska, and Kansas lies in a valley which contains PierreShale as part of its geological substrata. Selenium is anindigenous constituent in the shale and is readily leached intosurrounding groundwater. The Basin is heavily irrigated throughthe pumping of groundwater, some of which is selenium-contaminated, onto fields in agricultural production. Water,sediment, benthic invertebrates, and/or fish were collected from46 sites in the Basin and were analyzed for selenium to determinethe potential for food-chain bioaccumulation, dietary toxicity,and reproductive effects of selenium in biota. Resultingselenium concentrations were compared to published guidelines orbiological effects thresholds. Water from 38% of the sites (n = 18) contained selenium concentrations exceeding 5 g L^-1, which is reported to be a high hazard for selenium accumulation into the planktonic food chain. An additional 12 sites (26% of the sites) contained selenium in water between 3–5 g L^-1, constituting a moderate hazard. Selenium concentrations in sedimentindicated little to no hazard for selenium accumulation fromsediments into the benthic food chain. Ninety-five percent ofbenthic invertebrates collected exhibited selenium concentrationsexceeding 3 g g^-1, a level reported as potentially lethal to fish and birds that consume them. Seventy-five percent of fish collected in 1997, 90% in 1998, and 64% in 1999 exceeded 4 g g^-1selenium, indicating a high potential for toxicity andreproductive effects. However, examination of weight profilesof various species of collected individual fish suggestedsuccessful recruitment in spite of selenium concentrations thatexceeded published biological effects thresholds for health andreproductive success. This finding suggested that universalapplication of published guidelines for selenium may beinappropriate or at least may need refinement for systems similarto the Republican River Basin. Additional research is needed todetermine the true impact of selenium on fish and wildliferesources in the Basin.     

Uncommon chromosomal mosaicism in chorionic villi

Three cases of unusual chromosomal mosaicism are reported for which the cytogenetic data show inconsistent findings between CVS and AC or fetal tissue, and which cannot be explained simply by non-disjunction. For case 1, in CVS the karyotype was 46,XY, whereas lymphocytes and fibroblasts revealed 69,XXY. DNA fingerprinting indicated one paternal and two maternal chromosome sets, the latter most probably due to omission of maternal meiosis II. For case 2, in CVS mos 46,XX/47,XX,+mar de novo was observed. Amniotic fluid cells had the karyotype 46,XX. The origin of the marker chromosome might be explained by at least two events of unknown order (a somatic chromosome/chromatid deletion and non-disjunction of the homologous chromosome). In case 3 (CVS: mos 46,XY/46,XY,19q+ de novo; amniotic fluid cells, lymphocytes, and fibroblasts: 46,XY), the surplus of chromosome material in 19q+ might be explained on the basis of a somatic translocation. The idea of a chimera is less convincing, as the mosaic finding is restricted to one tissue. Furthermore, there was no hint of a vanishing twin. Hitherto, no case of structural chromosome mosaicism in CVS has been reconfirmed in fetal tissues.