Time filter

Source Type

Xu S.,Health and Environmental SciencesDow CorningMidland | Kozerski G.,Health and Environmental SciencesDow CorningMidland | Powell D.E.,Health and Environmental SciencesDow CorningMidland | Woodburn K.B.,Health and Environmental SciencesDow CorningMidland | And 2 more authors.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

As part of an initiative to evaluate commercial chemicals for their effects on human and environmental health, Canada recently evaluated decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5; CAS no. 541-02-06), a high-volume production chemical used in many personal care products. The evaluation illustrated the challenges encountered in environmental risk assessments and the need for the development of better tools to increase the weight of evidence in environmental risk assessments. The present study presents a new risk analysis method that applies thermodynamic principles of fugacity and activity to express the results of field monitoring and laboratory bioaccumulation and toxicity studies in a comprehensive risk analysis that can support risk assessments. Fugacity and activity ratios of D5 derived from bioaccumulation measures indicate that D5 does not biomagnify in food webs, likely because of biotransformation. The fugacity and activity analysis further demonstrates that reported no-observed-effect concentrations of D5 normally cannot occur in the environment. Observed fugacities and activities in the environment are, without exception, far below those corresponding with no observed effects, in many cases by several orders of magnitude. This analysis supports the conclusion of the Canadian Board of Review and the Minister of the Environment that D5 does not pose a danger to the environment. The present study further illustrates some of the limitations of a persistence-bioaccumulation-toxicity-type criteria-based risk assessment approach and discusses the merits of the fugacity and activity approach to increase the weight of evidence and consistency in environmental risk assessments of commercial chemicals. © 2015 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of SETAC. Source

Fairbrother A.,ExponentBellevue | Burton G.A.,Cooperative Institute for Limnology and Ecosystems ResearchUniversity of MichiganAnn Arbor | Klaine S.J.,North West University South Africa | Powell D.E.,Dow CorningMidland | And 3 more authors.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5) is used in personal care products and industrial applications. The authors summarize the risks to the environment from D5 based on multiple lines of evidence and conclude that it presents negligible risk. Laboratory and field studies show that D5 is not toxic to aquatic organisms or benthic invertebrates up to its solubility limit in water or porewater or its sorptive capacity in sediment. Comparison of lipid-normalized internal concentrations with measured concentrations in benthos indicates that field-collected organisms do not achieve toxic levels of D5 in their tissues, suggesting negligible risk. Exposure to D5 resulted in a slight reduction of root biomass in barley at test concentrations 2 orders of magnitude greater than measured D5 levels in biosolids-amended soils and more than twice as high as the maximum calculated sorptive capacity of the soil. No effects were observed in soil invertebrates exposed to similar concentrations, indicating that D5 poses a de minimis risk to the terrestrial environment. High rates of metabolism and elimination of D5 compared with uptake rates from food results in biodilution in the food web rather than biomagnification, culminating in de minimis risk to higher trophic level organisms via the food chain. A fugacity approach substantiates all conclusions that were made on a concentration basis. © 2015 SETAC. Source

Sample B.E.,Ecological RiskRancho Murieta | Fairbrother A.,ExponentBellevue | Kaiser A.,ExponentBellevue | Law S.,ExponentAlexandria
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Ecological soil-screening levels (Eco-SSLs) were developed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for the purposes of setting conservative soil screening values that can be used to eliminate the need for further ecological assessment for specific analytes at a given site. Ecological soil-screening levels for wildlife represent a simplified dietary exposure model solved in terms of soil concentrations to produce exposure equal to a no-observed-adverse-effect toxicity reference value (TRV). Sensitivity analyses were performed for 6 avian and mammalian model species, and 16 metals/metalloids for which Eco-SSLs have been developed. The relative influence of model parameters was expressed as the absolute value of the range of variation observed in the resulting soil concentration when exposure is equal to the TRV. Rank analysis of variance was used to identify parameters with greatest influence on model output. For both birds and mammals, soil ingestion displayed the broadest overall range (variability), although TRVs consistently had the greatest influence on calculated soil concentrations; bioavailability in food was consistently the least influential parameter, although an important site-specific variable. Relative importance of parameters differed by trophic group. Soil ingestion ranked 2nd for carnivores and herbivores, but was 4th for invertivores. Different patterns were exhibited, depending on which parameter, trophic group, and analyte combination was considered. The approach for TRV selection was also examined in detail, with Cu as the representative analyte. The underlying assumption that generic body-weight-normalized TRVs can be used to derive protective levels for any species is not supported by the data. Whereas the use of site-, species-, and analyte-specific exposure parameters is recommended to reduce variation in exposure estimates (soil protection level), improvement of TRVs is more problematic. © 2014 The Authors. Source

Discover hidden collaborations