| PM10中重金属的健康风险评估及修正方法比较 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 冯茜丹,刘志磊,陈启宇,陈希超,高梓旭,王钰钰,郑彤,刘芸,林必桂.PM10中重金属的健康风险评估及修正方法比较[J].中国环境科学,2022,42(10):4880-4888. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 冯茜丹 刘志磊 陈启宇 陈希超 高梓旭 王钰钰 郑彤 刘芸 林必桂 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 1. 仲恺农业工程学院资源与环境学院, 广东 广州 510225;2. 中国热带农业科学院环境与植物保护研究所, 海南 海口 571101;3. 生态环境部华南环境科学研究所, 国家环境保护环境污染健康风险评价重点实验室, 广东 广州 510655;4. 中国医科大学公共卫生学院, 辽宁 沈阳 110122 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务专项（PM-zx703-202104-056，1630042021024）；国家重点研发计划项目（2019YFC1805504，2019YFC1805505）；国家自然科学基金青年科学基金资助项目（41105093）；广东省高等学校优秀青年教师培养计划项目（粤教师函[2014]145号） |
| |
| 摘 要： | 通过对华南某电子垃圾拆解区PM10中重金属含量特征分析，计算该地区的人群暴露量，评估人群健康风险，并引入靶器官毒性剂量法（TTD）和证据权重法（WOE）对常规评估方法的非致癌健康风险进行修正，比较探讨3种方法对非致癌健康风险评估结果的影响.结果表明：研究区域夏，冬季节的非致癌和致癌健康风险均为：儿童>成年女性>成年男性，重金属Ni对人群可能存在致癌风险（ILCR在10-6~10-4之间）.其中，Cr，Pb，Cd和As 4种重金属（类金属）对成年男性的非致癌健康风险值为3.05×10-2，经TTD法和WOE法修正后为5.41×10-2和5.4×10-1，表明当综合考虑重金属作用的靶器官及重金属间的相互作用时，PM10中重金属的非致癌健康风险值高于常规方法.
|
| 关 键 词： | PM10 重金属 健康风险评估 靶器官毒性剂量法 证据权重法 |
| 收稿时间： | 2022-03-15 |
Comparison of health risk assessment and correction methods of heavy metals in PM10 |
| |
| FENG Xi-dan,LIU Zhi-lei,CHEN Qi-yu,CHEN Xi-chao,GAO Zi-xu,WANG Yu-yu,ZHENG Tong,LIU Yun,LIN Bi-gui.Comparison of health risk assessment and correction methods of heavy metals in PM10[J].China Environmental Science,2022,42(10):4880-4888. |
| |
| Authors: | FENG Xi-dan LIU Zhi-lei CHEN Qi-yu CHEN Xi-chao GAO Zi-xu WANG Yu-yu ZHENG Tong LIU Yun LIN Bi-gui |
| |
| Abstract: | In this study, we characterized the content of heavy metals in PM10, calculated the exposure levels for population and assessed the human health risks in an electronic waste dismantling area of South China. Subsequently, the non-carcinogenic health risks of the population were amended by the target organ toxic dose (TTD) method and weight of evidence (WOE) method, respectively. The results showed that the non-carcinogenic health risks in the summer and winter were:children > adult women > adult men, and the heavy metal Ni was probably carcinogenic risks to the population (ranged from 10-6 to 10-4). The non-carcinogenic health risk values of Cr, Pb, Cd and As for adult males were 3.05×10-2 and the corrected risk values by the TTD and WOE methods were 5.41×10-2 and 5.4×10-1. Our results indicated that the assessment of non-carcinogenic health risk values of heavy metals from PM10 should comprehensively consider the interactions between heavy metals. |
| |
| Keywords: | PM10 heavy metals health risk assessment target organ toxicity dose method evidence weight method |
|
| 点击此处可从《中国环境科学》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《中国环境科学》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
