Dietary arsenic consumption and urine arsenic in an endemic population: response to improvement of drinking water quality in a 2-year consecutive study

We assessed the association between arsenic intake through water and diet, and arsenic levels in first morning-void urine under variable conditions of water contamination. This was done in a 2-year consecutive study in an endemic population. Exposure of arsenic through water and diet was assessed for participants using arsenic-contaminated water (≥50 μg L^?1) in a first year (group I) and for participants using water lower in arsenic (<50 μg L^?1) in the next year (group II). Participants with and without arsenical skin lesions were considered in the statistical analysis. Median dose of arsenic intake through drinking water in groups I and II males was 7.44 and 0.85 μg kg body wt.^?1 day^?1 (p <0.0001). In females, it was 5.3 and 0.63 μg kg body wt.^?1 day^?1 (p <0.0001) for groups I and II, respectively. Arsenic dose through diet was 3.3 and 2.6 μg kg body wt.^?1 day^?1 (p?=?0.088) in males and 2.6 and 1.9 μg kg body wt.^?1 day^?1 (p?=?0.0081) in females. Median arsenic levels in urine of groups I and II males were 124 and 61 μg L^?1 (p?=?0.052) and in females 130 and 52 μg L^?1 (p?=?0.0001), respectively. When arsenic levels in the water were reduced to below 50 μg L^?1 (Indian permissible limit), total arsenic intake and arsenic intake through the water significantly decreased, but arsenic uptake through the diet was found to be not significantly affected. Moreover, it was found that drinking water mainly contributed to variations in urine arsenic concentrations. However, differences between male and female participants also indicate that not only arsenic uptake, but also many physiological factors affect arsenic behavior in the body and its excretion. As total median arsenic exposure still often exceeded 3.0 μg kg body wt.^?1 day^?1 (the permissible lower limit established by the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives) after installation of the drinking water filters, it can be concluded that supplying the filtered water only may not be sufficient to minimize arsenic availability for an already endemic population.     

Experimental determination of efficiency of capping materials during consolidation of metal-contaminated dredged material

Capping has received considerable attention as a method to reduce contaminant transport from contaminated sediments and sub-aqueous disposed dredged materials. Consolidation of dredged material after capping can result in a substantial advection of pore water, into or through the capping layer. The effect of two different capping materials (crushed limestone and gneiss) on the transport of heavy metals and phosphorus during consolidation was studied with a novel experimental design. Capped dredged material was placed in a consolidation cell and pore water expelled during the consolidation was collected for chemical analysis. To support interpretation of the results from this test, interactions between the capping material and the dredged material were also studied in batch tests. The study revealed large differences in the capping efficiency (CE) between the two materials. Both materials were efficient caps for Fe and P (CE>99% with 2cm cap), while limestone also was efficient for Mn (CE>92% with 2cm cap). Contrary to what was expected, capping of dredged material with crushed gneiss increased the release of Ca, Mn, Co, Ni, Cd, and Cu, resulting in negative CE. The batch tests showed that leaching from the crushed gneiss was the source of the observed release of metals. The results also show that the high concentrations of heavy metals in the dredged material were immobilised, probably by sulphides. Protection against re-suspension and oxidation will therefore in many cases be the most important effect of the cap.     

Prenatal testing for imprinting disorders: A laboratory perspective

Imprinting Disorders (ImpDis) are a group of congenital syndromes associated with up to four different types of molecular disturbances affecting the monoallelic and parent-of-origin specific expression of genomically imprinted genes. Though each ImpDis is characterized by aberrations at a distinct genetic site and a specific set of postnatal clinical signs, there is a broad overlap between several of them. In particular, the prenatal features of ImpDis are non-specific. Therefore, the decision on the appropriate molecular testing strategy is difficult. A further molecular characteristic of ImpDis is (epi)genetic mosaicism, which makes prenatal testing for ImpDis challenging. Accordingly, sampling and diagnostic workup has to consider the methodological limitations. Furthermore, the prediction of the clinical outcome of a pregnancy can be difficult. False-negative results can occur, and therefore fetal imaging should be the diagnostic tool on which decisions on the management of the pregnancy should be based. In summary, the decision for molecular prenatal testing for ImpDis should be based on close exchanges between clinicians, geneticists, and the families before the initiation of the test. These discussions should weigh the chances and challenges of the prenatal test, with focus on the need of the family.