2004
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-004-2555-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Combined biological and chemical assessment of estrogenic activities in wastewater treatment plant effluents

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
60
1
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
4
60
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These mechanisms were supported by many field studies involving wastewater treatment Sumpter 2001, Baronti et al 2000), in which good removal of E2 was obtained whereas E1 removal was not satisfactory. Since E1 still has relatively high estrogenic potency, its removal from wastewater is important in order to achieve an overall reduction in total estrogenic activity (Aerni et al 2004). The two strains, especially strain E2Y4, exhibited high E2-and E1-degrading capacities and thus hold great promise for conditions requiring the complete mineralization of estrogen.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These mechanisms were supported by many field studies involving wastewater treatment Sumpter 2001, Baronti et al 2000), in which good removal of E2 was obtained whereas E1 removal was not satisfactory. Since E1 still has relatively high estrogenic potency, its removal from wastewater is important in order to achieve an overall reduction in total estrogenic activity (Aerni et al 2004). The two strains, especially strain E2Y4, exhibited high E2-and E1-degrading capacities and thus hold great promise for conditions requiring the complete mineralization of estrogen.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The five strains decreased the estrogenic activities in the culture solution to 1/15 * 1/10 on day 1 and to 1/36 * 1/18 on day 15, as expressed as a fraction of the initial activity. Since the estrogenic activity of E1 is about 38-50% of that of E2, according to YES assays (Johnson and Sumpter 2001;Aerni et al 2004), the transformation by the isolates of E2 to E1 has the potential to reduce the estrogen activity of the test solution. Furthermore, the decrease in estrogenic activities obtained with strains E2Y4 and E2Y1 was most likely due to their ability to degrade both E2 and E1.…”
Section: E1 Degradation By the Isolated Strainsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As mentioned before, the LOD of the present YES bioassay was 8.7 E-03 ng EEQs/ ml. Previous studies have reported a wide range of LOD (0.01E-03 to 5.0E-02 ng E2/ml) for the YES bioassays (Fawell et al 2001;Aerni et al 2004;Lorenzen et al 2004). Our LOD is very close to the low range of the reported LOD values.…”
Section: Effects Of Yes Bioassay and Extraction Efficiency On Estrogementioning
confidence: 98%
“…In parallel, the importance of detecting micropollutants was emphasized through the development of biotests (e.g., specialized to identify compounds with endocrine disrupting properties), which pointed out to the high biological activity of some class of micropollutants. For instance, the ubiquitous distribution in the environment of EDCs and their harmful potential was emphasized through the development of very sensitive biological tests based on immunological techniques such as ELISA or on endocrine functions such as yeast estrogen screen (YES) (Huang and Sedlak 2001;Aerni et al 2003;Bringolf and Summerfelt 2003;Matsunaga et al 2003) E-SCREEN assay (Soto et al 1995), EROD activity assay (Ma et al 2005) or combination of bioassays (Oh et al 2006). Part of these studies concluded that some of these compounds [e.g., alkylphenol ethoxylates, bisphenol A (BPA), estrone (E1), 17b-estradiol (E2), 17a-ethinylestradiol (EE2)] can have high (specific biological) estrogenic activity even at extremely low concentration (Purdom et al 1994;Jobling et al 1998).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%