Urinary biomonitoring of exposure to glyphosate and its metabolite amino-methyl phosphonic acid among farmers and non-farmers in Morocco.

Zineb Ben Khadda, Simona Gabriela Bungau, Souleiman El Balkhi, Said Ezrari, Andrei-Flavius Radu, Tarik Sqalli Houssaini, Sanae Achour
{"title":"Urinary biomonitoring of exposure to glyphosate and its metabolite amino-methyl phosphonic acid among farmers and non-farmers in Morocco.","authors":"Zineb Ben Khadda, Simona Gabriela Bungau, Souleiman El Balkhi, Said Ezrari, Andrei-Flavius Radu, Tarik Sqalli Houssaini, Sanae Achour","doi":"10.1016/j.etap.2024.104620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Glyphosate, a widely used herbicide in global agriculture, poses potential health risks due to environmental and dietary exposure. This study evaluated urinary concentrations of glyphosate and its metabolite, amino-methyl phosphonic acid (AMPA), among farmers and non-farmers in Morocco's Fez-Meknes region, using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Glyphosate was detected in 57.14 % of farmers, 35.41 % of indirectly exposed residents, and 24 % of controls, while AMPA was present in 5.35 % of farmers only. Average glyphosate levels were 0.176 μg/L in farmers, 0.098 μg/L in indirectly exposed individuals, and 0.069 μg/L in controls, with AMPA averaging 0.253 μg/L in farmers. Sociodemographic factors, such as education level, farm residence, and herbicide storage, significantly influenced glyphosate levels, while reusing pesticide containers strongly correlated with elevated glyphosate and AMPA concentrations. Estimated daily intakes (EDIs), hazard quotients (HQs), and a hazard index (HI) were calculated to analyze the obtained data from a health risk perspective. Farmers had higher EDIGM values for AMPA (0.303 µg/d/kg) and Glyphosate (0.140 µg/d/kg) compared to the control group, which had significantly lower values of 0.110 µg/d/kg for AMPA and 0.080 µg/d/kg for Glyphosate. The HQs were calculated considering 0.5 mg/kg BW/day as an acceptable daily intake (ADI), which EFSA has established as a health-based reference value for both analytes. The values obtained were lower than 1, indicating that the health risk from Glyphosate and AMPA exposure was considered acceptable for the studied population.</p>","PeriodicalId":93992,"journal":{"name":"Environmental toxicology and pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"104620"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental toxicology and pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2024.104620","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Glyphosate, a widely used herbicide in global agriculture, poses potential health risks due to environmental and dietary exposure. This study evaluated urinary concentrations of glyphosate and its metabolite, amino-methyl phosphonic acid (AMPA), among farmers and non-farmers in Morocco's Fez-Meknes region, using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Glyphosate was detected in 57.14 % of farmers, 35.41 % of indirectly exposed residents, and 24 % of controls, while AMPA was present in 5.35 % of farmers only. Average glyphosate levels were 0.176 μg/L in farmers, 0.098 μg/L in indirectly exposed individuals, and 0.069 μg/L in controls, with AMPA averaging 0.253 μg/L in farmers. Sociodemographic factors, such as education level, farm residence, and herbicide storage, significantly influenced glyphosate levels, while reusing pesticide containers strongly correlated with elevated glyphosate and AMPA concentrations. Estimated daily intakes (EDIs), hazard quotients (HQs), and a hazard index (HI) were calculated to analyze the obtained data from a health risk perspective. Farmers had higher EDIGM values for AMPA (0.303 µg/d/kg) and Glyphosate (0.140 µg/d/kg) compared to the control group, which had significantly lower values of 0.110 µg/d/kg for AMPA and 0.080 µg/d/kg for Glyphosate. The HQs were calculated considering 0.5 mg/kg BW/day as an acceptable daily intake (ADI), which EFSA has established as a health-based reference value for both analytes. The values obtained were lower than 1, indicating that the health risk from Glyphosate and AMPA exposure was considered acceptable for the studied population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
摩洛哥农民和非农民接触草甘膦及其代谢物氨基甲基膦酸的尿液生物监测。
草甘膦是一种在全球农业中广泛使用的除草剂,由于环境和饮食暴露,对健康构成潜在风险。本研究利用液相色谱-串联质谱法评估了摩洛哥菲斯-梅克内斯地区农民和非农民尿液中草甘膦及其代谢物氨基甲基膦酸(AMPA)的浓度。57.14%的农民、35.41%的间接暴露居民和24%的对照检测到草甘膦,而AMPA仅在5.35%的农民中存在。农民的平均草甘膦水平为0.176μg/L,间接暴露个体为0.098μg/L,对照组为0.069μg/L,农民的AMPA平均为0.253μg/L。社会人口因素,如教育水平、农场居住和除草剂储存,显著影响草甘膦水平,而重复使用农药容器与草甘膦和AMPA浓度升高密切相关。计算估计每日摄入量(EDIs)、危害商数(HQs)和危害指数(HI),从健康风险角度分析获得的数据。与对照组相比,农民对AMPA(0.303µg/d/kg)和草甘膦(0.140µg/d/kg)的EDIGM值更高,而对AMPA(0.110µg/d/kg)和草甘膦(0.080µg/d/kg)的EDIGM值显著较低。hq的计算考虑了0.5mg/kg体重/天作为可接受的每日摄入量(ADI),这是欧洲食品安全局为这两种分析物建立的基于健康的参考值。所获得的数值低于1,表明草甘膦和AMPA暴露的健康风险对于研究人群来说是可以接受的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cytotoxicity of sub-lethal doses of vanadium pentoxide in male Oryctolagus cuniculus. Mixture effects of arsenic and chromium on erythrocytic nuclear abnormalities and expression of DNA repair, tumor suppressor and apoptotic genes in liver of zebrafish. Environmental and biological measurements of the anesthetic isoflurane and its possible toxic effects in veterinarians. Serum levels of glycosylated hemoglobin, insulin, total protein and their association with somatoform disorder in environmentally exposed populations in Kazakhstan. Analysis of cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of diesel exhaust PM2.5 generated from diesel and dual natural gas-diesel engines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1