2019
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-07183-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Organochlorine pesticides in the surrounding soils of POPs destruction facility: source fingerprinting, human health, and ecological risks assessment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
0
15
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the present study, the calculated average ratio was 0.16, suggesting the contamination owing to lindane. Previous studies in Pakistan conducted in different environmental matrices reported the ongoing use of lindane, 23,24,42 which suggested the contamination of indoor settings perhaps through the drift in soil and air from the nearby areas. Moreover, β‐HCH was detected more frequently in the sampling sites as compared to the α‐HCH and ϒ‐HCH isomers indicated the contamination of indoor settings because of the historic application of HCH in Lahore 15,24 …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…In the present study, the calculated average ratio was 0.16, suggesting the contamination owing to lindane. Previous studies in Pakistan conducted in different environmental matrices reported the ongoing use of lindane, 23,24,42 which suggested the contamination of indoor settings perhaps through the drift in soil and air from the nearby areas. Moreover, β‐HCH was detected more frequently in the sampling sites as compared to the α‐HCH and ϒ‐HCH isomers indicated the contamination of indoor settings because of the historic application of HCH in Lahore 15,24 …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whereas C d is the concentration of OCPs (ng/g), EF is the exposure frequency (days/year), ED is the exposure duration for each studied age group (years), AT is the averaging lifetime duration (days) and calculated as exposure frequency multiplied by exposure duration, CSF is the cancer slope factor (mg/kg/day) −1 , RfD is the reference dose (ng/kg.day), BW is the body weight for adults and toddlers (kg), AF is the adherence factor for adults and toddlers skin (mg/cm 2 ), InhR d is the dust inhalation rate for adults and toddlers (m 3 /day), IngR d is the ingestion rate for adults and toddlers (mg/day), SA is the skin exposure surface area for adults and toddlers (cm 2 ), ABS der is the dermal absorption factor (unitless), GIABS is the gastrointestinal absorption factor (unitless), PEF is the particulate emission factor (m 3 /kg), IUR is the inhalation unit risk factor (μg/m 3 ) −1 , and CF is the conversion factor (1 × 10 −6 kg/mg) 30,42,44‐47 . The DF is a correction factor for assumed dust fractions as ~70% (>10 µm) for ingestion and dermal exposure, and ~30% (<10 µm ) for the inhalation exposure 39 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Some studies have considered both ingestion and dermal contact and calculated the noncarcinogenic health risk (HI) and the cancer risk (CR) associated with drinking water and bathing exposure. In sediment and soil, human exposure was assessed covering the cancer and noncancer risk, also called total lifetime carcinogenic risk (TCLR) and total noncarcinogenic hazard quotient (THQ) [ 39 , 40 , 41 ]. Thus, the human exposure and health risk were assessed as a sum of the risk for inhalation, ingestion, and dermal exposure.…”
Section: Environmental and Dietary Exposure To Pesticidesmentioning
confidence: 99%