Analysis of estrogenic hormones in municipal wastewater effluent and surface water using enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay and gas chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry

Huang, Ching-Hua; Sedlak, David L.

doi:10.1002/etc.5620200114

Cited by 347 publications

(171 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

157

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…17- β Estradiol levels of female control rats, oophorectomized female rats, and oophorectomized female rats treated with exogenous estrogen replacement therapy were measured using an Estradiol ELISA Kit (Neogen Corporation, Lexington, KY) unpublished data, [24, 25], vaginal swabs (uterus) were performed to document loss of epithelium and to document a relative “post-menopausal” state. Briefly, samples or standards were added to the microplate, followed by the diluted enzyme conjugate.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential Regulation of Aortic Growth in Male and Female Rodents Is Associated With AAA Development

Cho

Woodrum

Roelofs

et al. 2009

Journal of Surgical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The objective was to examine effects of gonadal hormone manipulation on aortic diameter and macrophage infiltration in rodents during abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) formation. Methods Experiment 1: 17-β estradiol and testosterone pellets were implanted in male (ME) and female (FT) rats. No pellet was implanted in shams (MES, FTS). Experiment 2: Testes and ovaries were removed from males (MO) and females (FO), respectively. No organs were removed from shams (MOS, FOS). Experiment 3: Male and female rats were orchiectomized and oophorectomized, respectively. Four weeks post-castration, testosterone (MOT) and 17-β estradiol (FOE) pellets were implanted. Shams underwent castration, but no pellet was implanted (MOTS, FOES). All rats underwent infrarenal aortic infusion with elastase postimplantation/postcastration. Diameters were measured on postoperative d 14. Tissue was stained for macrophages by immunohistochemistry. Results Diameter (P = 0.046) and macrophage counts (P = 0.014) decreased in ME compared with shams, but not in females treated with testosterone (FT). Diameter (P = 0.019) and macrophage infiltration (P = 0.024) decreased in MO compared with shams, but not in FO. Diameter increased in MOT compared with MOTS (P = 0.033), but decreased in FOE compared with FOES (P = 0.002). Macrophages decreased in FOE compared with FOES (P = 0.002). Conclusion This study documents a decrease in AAA diameter in males treated with estrogen or undergoing orchiectomy, but no changes in females treated with testosterone or undergoing oophorectomy; and an increase in diameter in MOT and a decrease in FOE. These data suggest that gonadal hormones differentially regulate AAA growth in association with changes in macrophages.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential Regulation of Aortic Growth in Male and Female Rodents Is Associated With AAA Development

Cho

Woodrum

Roelofs

et al. 2009

Journal of Surgical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The incomplete removal by publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) of excreted endogenous estrogens and prescribed estrogens leads to their introduction into surface waters and potentially into drinking water sources that rely on surface water. Estrogens, specifically estrone (E1), 17β-estradiol (E2), estriol (E3), and ethinyl estradiol (EE2), have been detected in numerous studies of wastewater influents and effluents (Baronti et al 2000; Belfroid et al 1999; Desbrow et al 1998; Ferguson et al 2001; Heberer 2002; Huang and Sedlak 2001; Huggett et al 2003; Laganà et al 2000; Mouatassim-Souali et al 2003; Nasu et al 2001; Rodgers-Gray et al 2000; Spengler et al 2001; Ternes et al 1999a, 1999b, 2002), and their presence has been confirmed in U.S. and European surface waters (Aherne and Briggs 1989; Belfroid et al 1999; Heberer 2002; Kolodziej et al 2003; Kolpin et al 2002; Kuch and Ballschmiter 2001). More recently, several estrogens have also been detected in the source water of drinking water treatment plants but not in the finished water (Benotti et al 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Assessment of Potential Exposure and Risk from Estrogens in Drinking Water

Caldwell

Mastrocco

Nowak

et al. 2010

Environ Health Perspect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDetection of estrogens in the environment has raised concerns in recent years because of their potential to affect both wildlife and humans.ObjectivesWe compared exposures to prescribed and naturally occurring estrogens in drinking water to exposures to naturally occurring background levels of estrogens in the diet of children and adults and to four independently derived acceptable daily intakes (ADIs) to determine whether drinking water intakes are larger or smaller than dietary intake or ADIs.MethodsWe used the Pharmaceutical Assessment and Transport Evaluation (PhATE) model to predict concentrations of estrogens potentially present in drinking water. Predicted drinking water concentrations were combined with default water intake rates to estimate drinking water exposures. Predicted drinking water intakes were compared to dietary intakes and also to ADIs. We present comparisons for individual estrogens as well as combined estrogens.ResultsIn the analysis we estimated that a child’s exposures to individual prescribed estrogens in drinking water are 730–480,000 times lower (depending upon estrogen type) than exposure to background levels of naturally occurring estrogens in milk. A child’s exposure to total estrogens in drinking water (prescribed and naturally occurring) is about 150 times lower than exposure from milk. Adult margins of exposure (MOEs) based on total dietary exposure are about 2 times smaller than those for children. Margins of safety (MOSs) for an adult’s exposure to total prescribed estrogens in drinking water vary from about 135 to > 17,000, depending on ADI. MOSs for exposure to total estrogens in drinking water are about 2 times lower than MOSs for prescribed estrogens. Depending on the ADI that is used, MOSs for young children range from 28 to 5,120 for total estrogens (including both prescribed and naturally occurring sources) in drinking water.ConclusionsThe consistently large MOEs and MOSs strongly suggest that prescribed and total estrogens that may potentially be present in drinking water in the United States are not causing adverse effects in U.S. residents, including sensitive subpopulations.

show abstract

“…At low extent of pollution the method could be used in conjunction with ELISA technique. Huang & Sedlak (2001) Figure 4. Chromatogram of E2 and EE2 at 100 ng/ml and 250 ng/ml…”

Section: Methods Sensitivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimized HPLC -UV Method for Separation, Detection and Quantification of Endocrine Disrupting Estrogens in Low Quality Water

Msigala¹,

Mabiki²,

Styrishave³

et al. 2017

IJC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Endocrine disrupting estrogens are emerging contaminants in aquatic ecosystems and environment in general. There are no guidelines for routine monitoring of these chemicals, despite the existing evidences of their adverse health effect to living organisms at low concentrations. This study aimed at developing and validating an optimized HPLC-UV method for detection and quantification of estradiol and ethinylestradiol. Isocratic elution was used for separation and detection of ethinylestradiol and estradiol. The mobile phase was applied with A; water B; acetonitrile (50:50) at flow rate of 0.7mL/min and injection volume 10mL. The precision and accuracy of the method were within the acceptable range. Relative standard deviation of peak area for E2 ranged from 1.373 to 3.668%, and for EE2 ranged from 0.829 to 6.495 %. The percentage recovery for E2 ranged from 82.3 to 99.84 %, and for EE2 ranged from 84.6 to 103.52 %. Linearity of the method was realized at range of 2.5 to 50 ng/mL and 100 to 1000 ng/mL for both E2 and EE2. The linear regression coefficients were 0.9979 and 0.9973 for E2 whereas for EE2 were 0.9983 and 0.9976. Limit of detection were found to be 0.05 ng/mL and 0.08 ng/mL for E2 and EE2 respectively. The obtained limits of quantification were 0.18 and 0.28 ng/mL for E2 and EE2 respectively. In untreated sewage the concentrations of E2 and EE2 were 0.28 ng/ml and 0.18 ng/ml respectively. But in subsequent wastewater stabilization ponds the concentrations were below detection limit. Therefore, the optimized HPLC-UV method is suitable for detection and quantification of endocrine disrupting estrogens when a level of pollution is at least 0.15 ng/ml. At low extent of pollution would require use of the method in conjunction with ELISA technique.

show abstract

Analysis of estrogenic hormones in municipal wastewater effluent and surface water using enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay and gas chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry

Cited by 347 publications

References 19 publications

Differential Regulation of Aortic Growth in Male and Female Rodents Is Associated With AAA Development

Differential Regulation of Aortic Growth in Male and Female Rodents Is Associated With AAA Development

An Assessment of Potential Exposure and Risk from Estrogens in Drinking Water

Optimized HPLC -UV Method for Separation, Detection and Quantification of Endocrine Disrupting Estrogens in Low Quality Water

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About