Cockell C S, Scherer K, Horneck G, Rettberg P, Facius R, Gugg-Helminger A, Driscoll C, Lee P
British Antarctic Survey High Cross, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ET, UK.
Photochem Photobiol. 2001 Oct;74(4):570-8. doi: 10.1562/0031-8655(2001)074<0570:eoafst>2.0.co;2.
During July 2000 we used an electronic personal dosimeter (X-2000) and a biological dosimeter (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt: Biofilm) to characterize the UV radiation exposure of arctic field scientists involved in biological and geological fieldwork. These personnel were working at the Haughton impact structure on Devon Island (75 degrees N) in the Canadian High Arctic under a 24 h photoperiod. During a typical day of field activities under a clear sky, the total daily erythemally weighted exposure, as measured by electronic dosimetry, was up to 5.8 standard erythemal dose (SED). Overcast skies (typically 7-8 okta of stratus) reduced exposures by a mean of 54%. We estimate that during a month of field activity in July a typical field scientist at this latitude could potentially receive approximately 80 SED to the face. Because of body movements the upper body was exposed to a UV regimen that often changed on second-to-second time-scales as assessed by electronic dosimetry. Over a typical 10 min period on vehicle traverse, we found that erythemal exposure could vary to up to 87% of the mean exposure. Time-integrated exposures showed that the type of outdoor field activities in the treeless expanse of the polar desert had little effect on the exposure received. Although absolute exposure changed in accordance with the time of day, the exposure ratio (dose received over horizontal dose) did not vary much over the day. Under clear skies the mean exposure ratio was 0.35 +/- 0.12 for individual activities at different times of the day assessed using electronic dosimetry. Biological dosimetry showed that the occupation was important in determining daily exposures. In our study, scientists in the field received an approximately two-fold higher dose than individuals, such as medics and computer scientists, who spent the majority of their time in tents.
2000年7月期间，我们使用了电子个人剂量计（X - 2000）和生物剂量计（德国航空航天中心：生物膜）来描述参与生物和地质野外工作的北极野外科学家的紫外线辐射暴露情况。这些人员在加拿大高北极地区德文岛（北纬75度）的霍顿撞击构造处工作，处于24小时光照周期。在晴朗天空下的典型野外活动日，通过电子剂量测定法测得的每日总红斑加权暴露量高达5.8标准红斑剂量（SED）。阴天（通常为7 - 8成层云）使暴露量平均降低了54%。我们估计，在7月的一个月野外活动期间，这个纬度的典型野外科学家面部可能会接收到约80 SED的辐射。由于身体移动，上半身暴露于紫外线的情况，通过电子剂量测定法评估发现，其往往在每秒的时间尺度上都会发生变化。在车辆行驶的典型10分钟时间段内，我们发现红斑暴露量可能会变化至平均暴露量的87%。时间积分暴露量表明，在极地沙漠无树区域的户外野外活动类型对所接收的暴露量影响不大。尽管绝对暴露量会根据一天中的时间而变化，但暴露比（所接收剂量与水平剂量之比）在一天中变化不大。在晴朗天空下，使用电子剂量测定法评估不同时间段的个体活动时，平均暴露比为0.35±0.12。生物剂量测定表明，职业在确定每日暴露量方面很重要。在我们的研究中，野外科学家所接收的剂量比大部分时间待在帐篷里的人员，如医务人员和计算机科学家，高出约两倍。
