A comprehensive and quantitative comparison of organophosphate esters: Characteristics, applications, environmental occurrence, toxicity, and health risks
Mengyan Huang, Lingjun Zeng, Chen Wang, Xuan Zhou, Yi Peng, Chongli Shi, Susu Wang, Yu Li, Damià Barceló, Hui Li
{"title":"A comprehensive and quantitative comparison of organophosphate esters: Characteristics, applications, environmental occurrence, toxicity, and health risks","authors":"Mengyan Huang, Lingjun Zeng, Chen Wang, Xuan Zhou, Yi Peng, Chongli Shi, Susu Wang, Yu Li, Damià Barceló, Hui Li","doi":"10.1080/10643389.2024.2406587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Organophosphate esters (OPEs) are substitutes for bromine flame retardants and are used in various consumer products. While OPEs have been extensively studied, the lack of systematic comparison among major OPEs contributes to ambiguity regarding their risks. Classified by substituents of Cl-OPEs, alkyl-OPEs, and aryl-OPEs, this review conducted a retrospective comparison and comprehensive analysis of physicochemical properties, use and regulation, environmental occurrence proportion, toxic effect thresholds, and degree of health risk, thus identifying typical high-risk OEPs that warrant greater scrutiny. Generally, Cl-OPEs and alkyl-OPEs exhibit higher concentration proportion than aryl-OPEs in various environmental media. Moreover, the toxic effects of Cl-OPEs and aryl-OPEs surpass those of alkyl-OPEs, notably tris(2-chloro-1(chloromethyl)ethyl) phosphate (TDCPP) and triphenyl phosphate (TPHP), alongside TDCPP, TPHP, tris(2-chloroisopropyl) phosphate (TCPP), tris(2-choroethyl) phosphate (TCEP), tris(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate (TBOEP), and tributyl phosphate (TNBP) as the most typical OPEs. Although OPEs at environment concentrations pose limited threats to human health, further assessment of the health risks posed by typical high-risk OPEs in sensitive populations is remain necessary. Overall, this review offers a more comprehensive perspective on the differences between typical OPEs and provides valuable insights into their future use and regulation.","PeriodicalId":10823,"journal":{"name":"Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2024.2406587","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Organophosphate esters (OPEs) are substitutes for bromine flame retardants and are used in various consumer products. While OPEs have been extensively studied, the lack of systematic comparison among major OPEs contributes to ambiguity regarding their risks. Classified by substituents of Cl-OPEs, alkyl-OPEs, and aryl-OPEs, this review conducted a retrospective comparison and comprehensive analysis of physicochemical properties, use and regulation, environmental occurrence proportion, toxic effect thresholds, and degree of health risk, thus identifying typical high-risk OEPs that warrant greater scrutiny. Generally, Cl-OPEs and alkyl-OPEs exhibit higher concentration proportion than aryl-OPEs in various environmental media. Moreover, the toxic effects of Cl-OPEs and aryl-OPEs surpass those of alkyl-OPEs, notably tris(2-chloro-1(chloromethyl)ethyl) phosphate (TDCPP) and triphenyl phosphate (TPHP), alongside TDCPP, TPHP, tris(2-chloroisopropyl) phosphate (TCPP), tris(2-choroethyl) phosphate (TCEP), tris(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate (TBOEP), and tributyl phosphate (TNBP) as the most typical OPEs. Although OPEs at environment concentrations pose limited threats to human health, further assessment of the health risks posed by typical high-risk OPEs in sensitive populations is remain necessary. Overall, this review offers a more comprehensive perspective on the differences between typical OPEs and provides valuable insights into their future use and regulation.
期刊介绍:
Two of the most pressing global challenges of our era involve understanding and addressing the multitude of environmental problems we face. In order to tackle them effectively, it is essential to devise logical strategies and methods for their control. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology serves as a valuable international platform for the comprehensive assessment of current knowledge across a wide range of environmental science topics.
Environmental science is a field that encompasses the intricate and fluid interactions between various scientific disciplines. These include earth and agricultural sciences, chemistry, biology, medicine, and engineering. Furthermore, new disciplines such as environmental toxicology and risk assessment have emerged in response to the increasing complexity of environmental challenges.
The purpose of Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology is to provide a space for critical analysis and evaluation of existing knowledge in environmental science. By doing so, it encourages the advancement of our understanding and the development of effective solutions. This journal plays a crucial role in fostering international cooperation and collaboration in addressing the pressing environmental issues of our time.