Mutagenicity assessment of different drinking water supplies before and after treatments

Use of the Comet test and micronucleus assay on human white blood cells for in vitro assessment of genotoxicity induced by different drinking water disinfection protocols

“…Recently, associations between the consumption of drinking water with high THM levels and adverse reproductive outcomes, including spontaneous abortion, birth defects, and intrauterine growth retardation have been reported [Gallagher et al, 1998;Waller et al, 1998;Klotz and Pyrch, 1999]. The toxicity of chlorinated water and DBPs has mainly been examined in short-term tests using bacteria and cultured animal cells [Loper, 1980;Monarca et al, 1985Monarca et al, , 1998Monarca et al, , 2002aMonarca et al, , 2003Wilcox and Williamson, 1986;Tuomisto and Vartiainen, 1990;Romero et al, 1992;Koivusalo et al, 1994;Plewa et al, 2002]. Additional mechanistic information is necessary to assess the potential human risks associated with water chlorination, and there is a particular need to understand the genotoxic effects of DBP mixtures in human cells.…”

Genotoxicity of surface water treated with different disinfectants using in situ plant tests

“…Drinking water has been intensively examined for gene mutations, primarily by assaying extracts of water in bacterial tests, and several studies on different disinfectants have been carried out [Koivusalo et al, 1994;Loper et al, 1980;Monarca 1985Monarca , 1998Monarca , 2002aRomero et al, 1992;Tuomisto et al, 1990;Wilcox and Williamson, 1986;Wilcox et al, 1988]. Plant genotoxicity tests measure different genetic endpoints (clastogenicity and aneugenicity) and allow researchers to study water in situ, without requiring lengthy and expensive methods for concentration.…”

“…Among the new disinfectants, peracetic acid (CH 3 -CO-OOH, PAA) deserves to be studied for its application in drinking water disinfection, since it is a potent antimicrobial agent and has many applications in hospitals, laboratories, and factories [Baldry et al, 1991[Baldry et al, , 1995Lefevre et al, 1992]. More recently, PAA has been found to be an effective biocidal compound for wastewater disinfection, and previous research showed that disinfection of lake and river drinking water with PAA gave rise to a very low level of genotoxicity and produced only carboxylic acids [Monarca et al, 2002a], which are not recognized as mutagenic.Drinking water has been intensively examined for gene mutations, primarily by assaying extracts of water in bacterial tests, and several studies on different disinfectants have been carried out [Koivusalo et al, 1994;Loper et al, 1980;Monarca 1985Monarca , 1998Monarca , 2002aRomero et al, 1992;Tuomisto et al, 1990;Wilcox and Williamson, 1986;Wilcox et al, 1988]. Plant genotoxicity tests measure different genetic endpoints (clastogenicity and aneugenicity) and allow researchers to study water in situ, without requiring lengthy and expensive methods for concentration.…”

A preliminary Ames fluctuation assay assessment of the genotoxicity of drinking water that has been solar disinfected in polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles

“…In the fluctuation assay a greater amount of sample volume can be tested without the need for concentration, thereby avoiding concentration methods that might change the original genotoxicity of the water sample (Monarca et al 1985;Stahl 1991;Le Curieux et al 1996). In addition, testing large volumes of water will result in a more accurate estimate of the genotoxic risk to which a SODIS user will be exposed since SODIS users do not concentrate their water before drinking.…”