首页> 外文期刊>Environmental toxicology and chemistry >Effects-Directed Analysis (EDA) and Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE): Complementary but Different Approaches for Diagnosing Causes of Environmental Toxicity
【24h】

Effects-Directed Analysis (EDA) and Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE): Complementary but Different Approaches for Diagnosing Causes of Environmental Toxicity

机译:效果导向分析(EDA)和毒性鉴定评估(TIE):诊断环境毒性原因的互补但不同的方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Currently, 2 approaches are available for performing environmental diagnostics on samples like municipal and industrial effluents, interstitial waters, and whole sediments to identify anthropogenic contaminants causing toxicological effects. One approach is toxicity identification evaluation (TIE), which was developed primarily in North America to determine active toxicants to whole-organism endpoints. The second approach is effects-directed analysis (EDA), which has origins in both Europe and North America. Unlike TIE, EDA uses primarily in vitro endpoints with an emphasis on organic contaminants as the cause of observed toxicity. The 2 approaches have fundamental differences that make them distinct techniques. In EDA, the sophisticated and elegant fractionation and chemical analyses performed to identify the causes of toxicity with a high degree of specificity often compromise contaminant bioavailability. In contrast, in TIE, toxicant bioavailability is maintained and is considered critical to accurately identifying the causes of environmental toxicity. However, maintaining contaminant bioavailability comes with the cost of limiting, at least until recently, the use of the types of sophisticated fractionation and elegant chemical analyses that have resulted in the high specificity of toxicant diagnosis performed in EDA. The present study provides an overview of each approach and highlights areas where the 2 approaches can complement one another and lead to the improvement of both.
机译:当前,有两种方法可用于对市政和工业废水,间隙水和整个沉积物等样品进行环境诊断,以识别引起毒理作用的人为污染物。一种方法是毒性鉴定评估(TIE),该方法主要在北美开发,用于确定针对整个生物终点的活性毒物。第二种方法是效果导向分析(EDA),它起源于欧洲和北美。与TIE不同,EDA主要使用体外终点,重点是有机污染物作为观察到的毒性原因。这两种方法具有根本的区别,这使它们成为不同的技术。在EDA中,进行复杂而优雅的分馏和化学分析以高度特异性识别毒性的原因,通常会损害污染物的生物利用度。相反,在TIE中,有毒物质的生物利用度得以维持,并被认为对于准确确定环境毒性的起因至关重要。但是,保持污染物的生物利用度的代价是至少在最近之前限制使用复杂的分馏类型和优美的化学分析,这导致了EDA中毒物诊断的高度特异性。本研究提供了每种方法的概述,并着重介绍了两种方法可以相互补充并导致两者改进的领域。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Environmental toxicology and chemistry》 |2013年第9期|1935-1945|共11页
  • 作者单位

    Atlantic Ecology Division, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Office of Research andDevelopment, US Environmental Protection Agency, Narragansett, Rhode Island, USA;

    Atlantic Ecology Division, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Office of Research andDevelopment, US Environmental Protection Agency, Narragansett, Rhode Island, USA;

    Department of Effects-Directed Analysis, UFZ Helmholt Center for Environmental Research, Leipzig, Germany;

    Institute for Environmental Studies, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Free University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);美国《生物学医学文摘》(MEDLINE);美国《化学文摘》(CA);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Effects-directed analysis; Toxicity identification evaluation; Environmental diagnosis; Fractionation; Bioavailability; Bioaccessibility;

    机译:效果导向分析;毒性鉴定评估;环境诊断;分馏;生物利用度;生物可及性;
  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 13:30:19

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号