建筑产品的生态毒理学评价:在水生生物试验电池中使用DSLT和渗透试验洗脱物的实验室间试验

IF 6 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Sciences Europe Pub Date : 2021-06-29 DOI:10.1186/s12302-021-00514-x
Ines Heisterkamp, Monika Ratte, Ute Schoknecht, Stefan Gartiser, Ute Kalbe, Outi Ilvonen
{"title":"建筑产品的生态毒理学评价:在水生生物试验电池中使用DSLT和渗透试验洗脱物的实验室间试验","authors":"Ines Heisterkamp,&nbsp;Monika Ratte,&nbsp;Ute Schoknecht,&nbsp;Stefan Gartiser,&nbsp;Ute Kalbe,&nbsp;Outi Ilvonen","doi":"10.1186/s12302-021-00514-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A European inter-laboratory test with 29 participating laboratories investigated whether a battery of four ecotoxicological tests is suitable for assessing the environmental compatibility of construction products. For this purpose, a construction product was investigated with the dynamic surface leaching test (DIN CEN/TS 16637-2) and the percolation test (DIN CEN/TS 16637-3). The eluates were produced centrally by one laboratory and were tested by the participants using the following biotests: algae test (ISO 8692), acute daphnia test (ISO 6341), luminescent bacteria test (DIN EN ISO 11348), and fish egg test (DIN EN ISO 15088). As toxicity measures, EC<sub>50</sub> and LID values were calculated.</p><p>Toxic effects of the eluates were detected by all four biotests. The bacteria test was by far the most sensitive, followed by the algae test and the daphnia test; the fish egg test was the least sensitive for eluates of both leaching tests. The toxicity level of the eluates was very high in the bacteria, daphnia, and algae test, with lowest ineffective dilution values of LID?=?70 to LID?=?13,000 and corresponding EC<sub>50</sub> values around or even below 1 volume percent. The reproducibility (<i>approximated by interlaboratory variability</i>) of the biotests was good (&lt;?53%) to very good (&lt;?20%), regardless of the toxicity level of the eluates. The reproducibility of the algae test was up to 80%, and thus still acceptable.</p><p>It can be confirmed that the combination of leaching and ecotoxicity tests is suitable to characterize with sufficient reproducibility the environmental impact posed by the release of hazardous substances from construction products.</p>","PeriodicalId":546,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sciences Europe","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12302-021-00514-x","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ecotoxicological evaluation of construction products: inter-laboratory test with DSLT and percolation test eluates in an aquatic biotest battery\",\"authors\":\"Ines Heisterkamp,&nbsp;Monika Ratte,&nbsp;Ute Schoknecht,&nbsp;Stefan Gartiser,&nbsp;Ute Kalbe,&nbsp;Outi Ilvonen\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12302-021-00514-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>A European inter-laboratory test with 29 participating laboratories investigated whether a battery of four ecotoxicological tests is suitable for assessing the environmental compatibility of construction products. For this purpose, a construction product was investigated with the dynamic surface leaching test (DIN CEN/TS 16637-2) and the percolation test (DIN CEN/TS 16637-3). The eluates were produced centrally by one laboratory and were tested by the participants using the following biotests: algae test (ISO 8692), acute daphnia test (ISO 6341), luminescent bacteria test (DIN EN ISO 11348), and fish egg test (DIN EN ISO 15088). As toxicity measures, EC<sub>50</sub> and LID values were calculated.</p><p>Toxic effects of the eluates were detected by all four biotests. The bacteria test was by far the most sensitive, followed by the algae test and the daphnia test; the fish egg test was the least sensitive for eluates of both leaching tests. The toxicity level of the eluates was very high in the bacteria, daphnia, and algae test, with lowest ineffective dilution values of LID?=?70 to LID?=?13,000 and corresponding EC<sub>50</sub> values around or even below 1 volume percent. The reproducibility (<i>approximated by interlaboratory variability</i>) of the biotests was good (&lt;?53%) to very good (&lt;?20%), regardless of the toxicity level of the eluates. The reproducibility of the algae test was up to 80%, and thus still acceptable.</p><p>It can be confirmed that the combination of leaching and ecotoxicity tests is suitable to characterize with sufficient reproducibility the environmental impact posed by the release of hazardous substances from construction products.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":546,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Sciences Europe\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12302-021-00514-x\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Sciences Europe\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-021-00514-x\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Sciences Europe","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-021-00514-x","RegionNum":3,"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: 8

摘要

一项由29个参与实验室参与的欧洲实验室间测试调查了四项生态毒理学测试是否适合评估建筑产品的环境兼容性。为此,对一种建筑产品进行了动态表面浸出试验(DIN CEN/TS 16637-2)和渗透试验(DIN CEN/TS 16637-3)。沉淀物由一个实验室集中生产,并由参与者使用以下生物测试进行测试:藻类测试(ISO 8692),急性水蚤测试(ISO 6341),发光细菌测试(DIN EN ISO 11348)和鱼卵测试(DIN EN ISO 15088)。作为毒性指标,计算EC50和LID值。四种生物试验均检测了洗脱液的毒性作用。细菌试验是最敏感的,其次是藻类试验和水蚤试验;鱼卵试验对两种浸出试验的洗脱液最不敏感。在细菌、水蚤和藻类试验中,洗脱液的毒性水平非常高,无效稀释值最低的是LID?=?70到LID?=?13000左右,相应的EC50值甚至低于1体积百分比。无论洗脱液的毒性水平如何,生物试验的再现性(由实验室间变异性近似得出)均为良好(53%)至极好(20%)。藻类测试的重现性高达80%,因此仍然可以接受。可以肯定的是,浸出和生态毒性试验相结合的方法适合用于表征建筑产品释放有害物质所造成的环境影响,并具有足够的可重复性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Ecotoxicological evaluation of construction products: inter-laboratory test with DSLT and percolation test eluates in an aquatic biotest battery

A European inter-laboratory test with 29 participating laboratories investigated whether a battery of four ecotoxicological tests is suitable for assessing the environmental compatibility of construction products. For this purpose, a construction product was investigated with the dynamic surface leaching test (DIN CEN/TS 16637-2) and the percolation test (DIN CEN/TS 16637-3). The eluates were produced centrally by one laboratory and were tested by the participants using the following biotests: algae test (ISO 8692), acute daphnia test (ISO 6341), luminescent bacteria test (DIN EN ISO 11348), and fish egg test (DIN EN ISO 15088). As toxicity measures, EC50 and LID values were calculated.

Toxic effects of the eluates were detected by all four biotests. The bacteria test was by far the most sensitive, followed by the algae test and the daphnia test; the fish egg test was the least sensitive for eluates of both leaching tests. The toxicity level of the eluates was very high in the bacteria, daphnia, and algae test, with lowest ineffective dilution values of LID?=?70 to LID?=?13,000 and corresponding EC50 values around or even below 1 volume percent. The reproducibility (approximated by interlaboratory variability) of the biotests was good (<?53%) to very good (<?20%), regardless of the toxicity level of the eluates. The reproducibility of the algae test was up to 80%, and thus still acceptable.

It can be confirmed that the combination of leaching and ecotoxicity tests is suitable to characterize with sufficient reproducibility the environmental impact posed by the release of hazardous substances from construction products.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Sciences Europe
Environmental Sciences Europe Environmental Science-Pollution
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
1.70%
发文量
110
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: ESEU is an international journal, focusing primarily on Europe, with a broad scope covering all aspects of environmental sciences, including the main topic regulation. ESEU will discuss the entanglement between environmental sciences and regulation because, in recent years, there have been misunderstandings and even disagreement between stakeholders in these two areas. ESEU will help to improve the comprehension of issues between environmental sciences and regulation. ESEU will be an outlet from the German-speaking (DACH) countries to Europe and an inlet from Europe to the DACH countries regarding environmental sciences and regulation. Moreover, ESEU will facilitate the exchange of ideas and interaction between Europe and the DACH countries regarding environmental regulatory issues. Although Europe is at the center of ESEU, the journal will not exclude the rest of the world, because regulatory issues pertaining to environmental sciences can be fully seen only from a global perspective.
期刊最新文献
Calculating the effect of intensive use of urban organic waste on soil concentrations of potentially toxic elements in a peri-urban agriculture context in Norway Disentangling mechanisms by which microplastic films affect plant-soil systems: physical effects of particles can override toxic effects of additives Insights into the role of hexa-bacterial consortium for bioremediation of soil contaminated with chlorantraniliprole Unlocking the potential of data harmonization and FAIRness in chemical risk assessment: lessons from practice and insights for policy development Heavy metal contamination and potential health risks in upland rice-producing soils of rotational shifting cultivation in northern Thailand
×
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