Evaluation of respiratory and cutaneous doses of chlorothalonil during re-entry in greenhouses

Aprea, Cristina; Centi, Letizia; Lunghini, Liana; Banchi, Bruno; Forti, Maria Aurelia; Sciarra, Gianfranco

doi:10.1016/s0378-4347(01)00541-2

Cited by 34 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Evaluation of skin exposure by pads of filter paper and hand washing with ethanol has also been reported in previous studies (Aprea et al, 1994(Aprea et al, , 1999(Aprea et al, , 2001(Aprea et al, , 2002(Aprea et al, , 2005. The sample extraction methods are fast, with good recovery of analyte and good within and between series precision.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…The concentration of imidacloprid measured in face pads did not, however, show any significant correlation with that in personal air samples, probably due to the fact that contamination of exposed skin can be attributed both to deposition of airborne particulate and to contact with contaminated hands and/or clothes. The present results (range 0.16-479.06 ng/cm 2 ) are of the same order of magnitude or higher than those reported in other studies on different pesticides: during various manual operations (positioning, spacing, selection and watering) in greenhouses treated with omethoate, the range of variation was 4.09-27.10 ng/cm 2 (Aprea et al, 2001), during stapling in tunnels treated with omethoate, the range of variation was 0.75-7.56 ng/cm 2 (Aprea et al, 2005), and finally during stapling of Scindapsus treated with chlorthalonil, contamination values were in the range 1.50-60.69 ng/cm 2 (Aprea et al, 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In the case of stapling of ornamental plants treated with chlorthalonil, personal exposure varied in the range 3.14-11.57 mg/m 3 (Aprea et al, 2002), and during stapling of Scindapsus treated with omethoate in tunnels, the concentration of active ingredient in personal air samples was in the range 0.32-1.14 mg/m 3 (Aprea et al, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The results (range 0.30-328.13 mg) were similar to those of previous studies of other pesticides in the same workplace: stapling of Scindapsus in greenhouses was associated with contamination of the hands by omethoate in the range 8.5-17.9 mg during the first day of re-entry (Aprea et al, 1994); during stapling of ornamental plants in tunnels, hand contamination was in the range 3.6-72.90 mg (Aprea et al, 2005); during manual operations in greenhouses treated with omethoate, hand contamination was in the range 2.3-868.00 mg (Aprea et al, 2001); finally, during stapling of Scindapsus treated with chlorthalonil, levels were in the range 31.64-289.56 mg (Aprea et al, 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One study was conducted (Calumpang and Medina, 1996) during spraying mango trees in the Philippines. Some studies have been conducted by our research group in greenhouses (Aprea et al, 1994(Aprea et al, , 1999(Aprea et al, , 2001(Aprea et al, , 2002 and tunnels (Aprea et al, 2005) during stapling of ornamental plants treated with different pesticides (phosphoric esters or chlorthalonil).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of inhaled and cutaneous doses of imidacloprid during stapling ornamental plants in tunnels or greenhouses

Aprea¹,

Lunghini²,

Banchi³

et al. 2008

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this research was to assess dermal and respiratory exposure of workers to imidacloprid during manual operations with ornamental plants previously treated in greenhouses or tunnels. A total of 10 female workers, 5 in greenhouses and 5 in tunnels, were monitored for 3 or 5 consecutive days. Actual skin contamination, excluding hands, was evaluated using nine filter paper pads placed directly on the skin. To evaluate the efficacy of protective clothing in reducing occupational exposure we also placed four pads on top of the outer clothing. Hand contamination was evaluated by washing with 95% ethanol. Respiratory exposure was evaluated by personal air sampling. Respiratory dose was calculated on the basis of a lung ventilation of 15 l/min. Absorbed doses were calculated assuming a skin penetration of 10% and a respiratory retention of 100%. Dislodgeable foliar residues (DFRs) were determined during the days of re-entry in order to determine the dermal transfer factor. From the dependence of dermal exposure of hands from DFRs, a mean transfer factor was estimated to be 36.4 cm 2 /h. Imidacloprid was determined by liquid chromatography with selective mass detection and electrospray interface in all matrices analysed. Respiratory dose was 4.1 ± 4.0 (0.1-14.3)% and 3.0 ± 2.0 (0.6-6.9)% (mean ± SD (range)) of the total real dose during work in tunnels and greenhouses, respectively. The estimated absorbed doses, 0.29 ± 0.45 mg/kg (0.06-2.25 mg/kg) body weight and 0.32±0.18 mg/kg (0.07-0.66 mg/kg) body weight (mean±SD (range)) in tunnels and in greenhouses, respectively, were less than the acceptable operator exposure level of 0.15 mg/kg body weight and than the acceptable daily intake of 0.05 mg/kg body weight. The hands and exposed skin of all workers were found to be contaminated, indicating that greater precautions, such as daily changing of gloves and clothing, are necessary to reduce skin exposure.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of inhaled and cutaneous doses of imidacloprid during stapling ornamental plants in tunnels or greenhouses

Aprea¹,

Lunghini²,

Banchi³

et al. 2008

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Chlorthalonil [MAK Value Documentation in German language, 2018]

Hartwig

Arand²

2018

The MAK‐Collection for Occupational Health and Safety

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The German Commission for the Investigation of Health Hazards of Chemical Compounds in the Work Area has re‐evaluated chlorothalonil [ 1897‐45‐6 ], considering all toxicological endpoints. Available publications and unpublished study reports are described in detail. In several carcinogenicity studies, orally applied chlorothalonil causes kidney toxicity in mice and rats and kidney tubular carcinomas only in F344 rats, but not in Osborne‐Mendel or Sprague Dawley rats. The reason for this strain difference is unknown. In cells of the kidney proximal tubuli thiols are formed which inhibit mitochondrial breathing. This results in cytotoxicity and necrosis followed by cell proliferation, hyperplasia, and tumours. The thiols are generated via β‐lyase which is more active in rats than in humans. As the mechanism of the formation of kidney tumours is evaluated as non‐genotoxic and no carcinomas occurred in Osborne‐Mendel or Sprague Dawley rats at doses higher than those used in F344 rats, chlorothalonil is no longer classified in Category 3 B for carcinogens. Chlorothalonil is irritating to nose, eyes and throat of workers at about 0.3 to 1.2 mg/m 3 and corrosive to the eye of rabbits. A NOAEC after repeated inhalation in humans or animals is not known, therefore no maximum concentration at the workplace (MAK value) can be derived and chlorothalonil is assigned to Section II b of the List of MAK and BAT Values. Chlorothalonil shows a skin sensitizing potential in humans and animals and labelling with “Sh” (for substances which cause sensitization of the skin), but not with “Sa” (for substances which cause sensitization of the airways) is retained. Dermal absorption of chlorothalonil is low and does not contribute significantly to systemic toxicity.

show abstract

Chlorothalonil [MAK Value Documentation, 2018]

Hartwig¹,

Arand²

2019

The MAK‐Collection for Occupational Health and Safety

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The German commission for the Investigation of Health Hazards of Chemical compounds in the work Area has re‐evaluated chlorothalonil [ 1897‐45‐6 ], considering all toxicological endpoints. Available publications and unpublished study reports are described in detail. In several carcinogenicity studies, orally applied chlorothalonil causes kidney toxicity in mice and rats and kidney tubular carcinomas only in F344 rats, but not in Osborne‐Mendel or Sprague Dawley rats. The reason for this strain difference is unknown. In cells of the kidney proximal tubules thiols are formed which inhibit mitochondrial breathing. This results in cytotoxicity and necrosis followed by cell proliferation, hyperplasia, and tumours. The thiols are generated via β‐lyase which is more active in rats than in humans. As the mechanism of the formation of kidney tumours is evaluated as non‐genotoxic and no carcinomas occurred in Osborne‐Mendel or Sprague Dawley rats at doses higher than those used in F344 rats, chlorothalonil is no longer classified in Category 3B for carcinogens. Chlorothalonil is irritating to nose, eyes and throat of workers at about 0.3 to 1.2 mg/m 3 and corrosive to the eye of rabbits. A NOAEC after repeated inhalation in humans or animals is not known, therefore no maximum concentration at the workplace (MAK value) can be derived and chlorothalonil is assigned to Section II b of the List of MAK and BAT Values. Chlorothalonil shows a skin sensitizing potential in humans and animals and labelling with “Sh” (for substances which cause sensitization of the skin), but not with “Sa” (for substances which cause sensitization of the airways) is retained. Dermal absorption of chlorothalonil is low and does not contribute significantly to systemic toxicity.

show abstract

Evaluation of respiratory and cutaneous doses of chlorothalonil during re-entry in greenhouses

Cited by 34 publications

References 25 publications

Evaluation of inhaled and cutaneous doses of imidacloprid during stapling ornamental plants in tunnels or greenhouses

Evaluation of inhaled and cutaneous doses of imidacloprid during stapling ornamental plants in tunnels or greenhouses

Chlorthalonil [MAK Value Documentation in German language, 2018]

Chlorothalonil [MAK Value Documentation, 2018]

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About