| Literature DB >> 27670774 |
Seung Chul Ahn1, Jun Young Chang2, Jung Sub Lee1, Hwa Yon Yu1, A-Ra Jung1, Jee-Young Kim3, Jong-Woo Choi3, Young-Seoub Hong4, Seung Do Yu1, Kyounghee Choi1.
Abstract
This study evaluated blood and urine cadmium (Cd) levels and human exposure factors for residents in an abandoned metal mine in Korea. We collected blood, urine, soil, water, and rice grain samples to analyze Cd concentrations and analyzed heavy metal concentration patterns in soil. We estimated the major exposure factor of Cd through non-carcinogenic risk assessment depending on exposure routes. The blood Cd concentration in the case group was 5.33 μg/L (geometric mean), significantly higher than that in the control group (1.63 μg/L, geometric mean). Urine Cd concentrations were also similar. The Cd concentrations in paddy soil (1.29 mg/kg) and rice grains (0.14 mg/kg) in the study area were higher than those in the control area (0.91 and 0.07 mg/kg, respectively). The analysis of heavy metal concentration in soil showed that the Cd levels in agricultural soil in the case group were attributable to the mine. The hazard quotient (HQ) of Cd by rice ingestion in the case group (1.25) was 2 times higher than that in the control group (0.6). We found that the HQ of rice ingestion contributed to more than 97 % of the total HQ, indicating that rice grains were the major exposure source. However, it is likely that the continuous intake of Cd-exposed crops led to chronic exposure among the residents in mine area.Entities:
Keywords: Abandoned metal mine; Cadmium; Human exposure factor; Rice grain; Risk assessment
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27670774 PMCID: PMC5655582 DOI: 10.1007/s10653-016-9872-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Geochem Health ISSN: 0269-4042 Impact factor: 4.609
Fig. 1Study area and sampling site
Exposure factors and parameters for risk assessment
| Exposure factors | Symbol | Units | Residential | Data source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exposure duration | ED | Years | 30 | EPA ( |
| Exposure frequency | EF | Days/year | 350 | EPA ( |
| Average time | AT | |||
| Non-carcinogens | ATnc | Years | 30 | EPA ( |
| Body weight | BW | kg | 62.8 | KMOE ( |
| Ingestion rate | IR | |||
| Soil | IRs | kg/day | 0.00002 | EPA ( |
| Rice (farmer) | IRr-f | kg/day | 0.296 | KOSTAT ( |
| Rice (non-farmer) | IRr-nf | kg/day | 0.175 | KOSTAT ( |
| Napa cabbage | IRn | kg/day | 0.0607 | KMOHW ( |
| Onion | IRo | kg/day | 0.0273 | KMOHW ( |
| Drinking water | IRw | L/day | 1.5 | KMOE ( |
| Exposed skin surface area | SA | |||
| Skin surface area (forearms, hands) | SAs | m2 | 1.96 | EPA ( |
| Soil-skin adherence factor | AF | kg/m2/day | 0.0007 | |
| Absorption factor for skin | ABSs | – | 0.01 | EPA ( |
Fig. 2Equation of average daily dose (ADD) by exposure pathway. ADD is the average daily dose of Cd (μg/kg-day); C is concentrations of Cd in each media; IR is the ingestion rate of each media (kg); ED is exposure duration (year); EF is exposure frequency (days/year); SAs is exposure to skin surface area; AF is the soil-skin adherence factor (kg/m2/day); ABS is the absorption factor for skin; BW is the average body weight of the general population in Korea (kg); AT is average time (years); and 365 is the exposure days/year
Basic characteristics of participants in this study
| Factors | Case ( | Control ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years)a | 71.4 ± 11.7 | 65.4 ± 9.5 | 0.126b |
| Residence period (person (%)) | |||
| <40 | 2 (22.2) | 4 (14.8) | 0.717c |
| 40–59 | 6 (66.7) | 17 (63.0) | |
| ≥60 | 1 (11.1) | 6 (22.2) | |
| Average (years) | 46.7 ± 16.1 | 49.8 ± 13.3 | |
| Present job (person (%)) | |||
| Farmer | 7 (77.8) | 26 (92.9) | 0.448c |
| Unemployed | 2 (22.2) | 2 (7.1) | |
| Abandoned mine (person (%)) | |||
| Working experience | 1 (11.1) | 4 (14.3) | 1.000c |
| Working period (years) | 5.0 | 3.0 ± 2.4 | – |
| Smoking habit (person (%)) | |||
| Current | 1 (11.1) | 2 (7.1) | 0.797c |
| Past | – | 1 (3.6) | |
| Non | 8 (88.9) | 25 (89.3) | |
| Drinking habit (person (%)) | |||
| Current | – | 14 (50.0) | 0.014c |
| Past | 1 (11.1) | 4 (14.3) | |
| Non | 8 (88.9) | 10 (35.7) | |
aArithmetic mean ± standard deviation
bIndependent sample t test
cChi-square test (Fisher’s exact test)
Dietary questionnaire results of participants in this study
| Factors | Case ( | Control ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Drinking water (person (%)) | |||
| Tap/mineral water | 3 (33.3) | 5 (17.8) | 0.064 |
| Ground water | 6 (66.7) | 23 (82.1) | |
| Rice (person (%)) | |||
| All self-sufficiency | 9 (100) | 21 (75.0) | 0.160 |
| All purchase | – | 7 (25.0) | |
| Vegetables (person (%)) | |||
| All self-sufficiency | 7 (77.8) | 26 (92.9) | 0.244 |
| All purchase | 2 (22.2) | 2 (7.1) | |
| Fish (person (%)) | |||
| All self-sufficiency | – | 11 (39.3) | 0.077 |
| Half self-sufficiency | 2 (22.2) | 3 (10.7) | |
| All purchase | 7 (77.8) | 14 (50.0) | |
| Shellfish (person (%)) | |||
| All self-sufficiency | 2 (22.2) | 23 (82.1) | 0.002 |
| All purchase | 7 (77.8) | 5 (17.9) | |
aChi-square test (Fisher’s exact test)
Cd concentrations in environmental samples
| Factors | Group |
| AMa | Min–Maxb |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paddy soil (mg/kg) | Case | 8 | 1.29 ± 0.39 | 0.93–2.17 | 0.029 |
| Control | 17 | 0.91 ± 0.10 | 0.66–1.02 | ||
| Rice grain (mg/kg) | Case | 8 | 0.14 ± 0.03 | 0.10–0.18 | 0.000 |
| Control | 22 | 0.07 ± 0.03 | 0.03–0.13 |
aArithmetic mean ± standard deviation
bMinimum–maximum
cIndependent sample t test
Cd concentrations in biological samples of participants
| Metalsa | Group |
| AM ± SDb | G.M (95 % C.I)c | Min–Maxd |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B-Cd (μg/L) | Case | 9 | 6.05 ± 3.13 | 5.33 (3.63, 7.45) | 2.29–11.66 | 0.000 |
| Control | 28 | 1.99 ± 1.12 | 1.63 (1.23, 2.08) | 0.20–4.04 | ||
| U-Cd (μg/L) | Case | 9 | 7.26 ± 4.32 | 5.31 (2.57, 9.80) | 0.67–11.93 | 0.003 |
| Control | 28 | 2.95 ± 3.51 | 1.02 (0.45, 2.04) | NDf–15.46 | ||
| U-Cd (μg/g-cr) | Case | 9 | 7.43 ± 4.59 | 6.19 (3.76, 9.13) | 1.44–17.67 | 0.000 |
| Control | 26 | 2.53 ± 2.50 | 1.16 (0.61, 2.05) | 0.05–7.73 |
a B-Cd blood Cd concentration, U-Cd urine Cd Concentration
bArithmetic mean ± standard deviation
cGeometric mean (95 % Confidence Interval)
dMinimum–maximum
eIndependent sample t test
fNot detected
Results of similarity matrix of soil samples
| Mine 1 | Mine 2 | Mine 3 | BKG | Case 1 | Case 2 | Case 3 | Case 4 | Case 5 | Case 6 | Case 7 | Control 1 | Control 2 | Control 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mine 1 | 0.593 | 0.630 | 0.587 | 0.667 | 0.645 | 0.602 | 0.646 | 0.623 | 0.655 | 0.653 | 0.600 | 0.603 | 0.598 | |
| Mine 2 | 0.593 | 0.303 | 0.611 | 0.444 | 0.532 | 0.665 | 0.637 | 0.636 | 0.668 | 0.626 | 0.627 | 0.627 | 0.642 | |
| Mine 3 | 0.630 | 0.303 | 0.395 | 0.715 | 0.479 | 0.358 | 0.450 | 0.412 | 0.434 | 0.467 | 0.401 | 0.412 | 0.421 | |
| BKGa | 0.587 | 0.611 | 0.395 | 0.655 | 0.731 | 0.755 | 0.917 | 0.934 | 0.891 | 0.894 | 0.956 | 0.919 | 0.930 | |
| Case 1 | 0.667 | 0.444 | 0.715 | 0.655 | 0.737 | 0.596 | 0.704 | 0.663 | 0.684 | 0.732 | 0.662 | 0.672 | 0.682 | |
| Case 2 | 0.645 | 0.532 | 0.479 | 0.731 | 0.737 | 0.790 | 0.790 | 0.775 | 0.736 | 0.812 | 0.758 | 0.789 | 0.763 | |
| Case 3 | 0.6302 | 0.665 | 0.358 | 0.755 | 0.596 | 0.790 | 0.799 | 0.809 | 0.774 | 0.805 | 0.785 | 0.796 | 0.786 | |
| Case 4 | 0.646 | 0.637 | 0.450 | 0.917 | 0.704 | 0.790 | 0.799 | 0.944 | 0.902 | 0.936 | 0.907 | 0.925 | 0.927 | |
| Case 5 | 0.623 | 0.636 | 0.412 | 0.937 | 0.663 | 0.775 | 0.809 | 0.944 | 0.897 | 0.928 | 0.931 | 0.936 | 0.931 | |
| Case 6 | 0.655 | 0.668 | 0.434 | 0.891 | 0.684 | 0.736 | 0.774 | 0.902 | 0.897 | 0.867 | 0.874 | 0.863 | 0.867 | |
| Case 7 | 0.653 | 0.626 | 0.467 | 0.894 | 0.732 | 0.812 | 0.805 | 0.936 | 0.928 | 0.867 | 0.917 | 0.911 | 0.915 | |
| Control 1 | 0.600 | 0.627 | 0.401 | 0.956 | 0.662 | 0.758 | 0.785 | 0.907 | 0.931 | 0.874 | 0.917 | 0.931 | 0.937 | |
| Control 2 | 0.603 | 0.627 | 0.412 | 0.919 | 0.672 | 0.789 | 0.796 | 0.925 | 0.936 | 0.863 | 0.911 | 0.931 | 0.955 | |
| Control 3 | 0.598 | 0.642 | 0.421 | 0.930 | 0.682 | 0.763 | 0.786 | 0.927 | 0.931 | 0.867 | 0.915 | 0.937 | 0.955 |
aBackground area
Fig. 3Dendrogram of the data set of relative ratios for heavy metal concentration in soil samples
Cd concentrations in environmental samples used for risk assessment
| Metals | Group | Paddy soil | Ground water | Rice grain | Napa cabbage | Onion | Cucumber |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cd (mg/kg) | Case | 1.29 | NDb | 0.14 | 0.007 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Control | 0.89 | NDb | 0.06 | 0.007 | 0.006 | 0.002 | |
|
| 0.026 | – | 0.000 | – | – | – |
aIndependent sample t test
bNot detected
Results of risk assessment according to exposure source and pathway
| Metals | Cd | |
|---|---|---|
| Group | Case | Control |
| HQ | ||
| Soil ingestion | 7.86E−04 | 5.46E−04 |
| Soil dermal contact | 5.39E−04 | 3.75E−04 |
| Water ingestion | 0.00E+00 | 0.00E+00 |
| Rice ingestion | 1.25E+00 | 6.00E−01 |
| Napa cabbage ingestion | 1.30E−02 | 1.30E−02 |
| Onion ingestion | 5.00E−03 | 5.00E−03 |
| Cucumber ingestion | 9.77E−04 | 9.77E−04 |
| Total HQ | 1.27E+00 | 6.20E−01 |