Department of Science and Environmental Studies, The Education University of Hong Kong, Tai Po, N.T., Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
State Key Laboratory of Environmental Aquatic Chemistry, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 100085 Beijing, China.
Environ Pollut. 2018 Apr;235:365-371. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2017.12.093. Epub 2018 Jan 5.
Organophosphate flame retardants (PFRs) and bisphenol A (BPA) were measured in indoor dust and PM samples from nine kindergartens and two primary schools in Hong Kong. The average levels of PM ranged from 4.0E+03 ng/m to 1.5E+04 ng/m. Average levels of PFRs (from 1.5 ng/m to 20 ng/m in PM; from 8.0E-02 μg/g dw to 2.4 μg/g dw in dust) and BPA (from 6.4E-01 ng/m to 1.0 ng/m in PM; from 1.0E-02 μg/g dw to 2.0E-01 μg/g dw in dust) were detected in most of the sampling sites. Tri-(2-Chloroethyl) phosphate (TCEP), tris(1,3-Dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCP), tris-(chloroisopropyl) phosphate (TCPP), and triphenyl phosphate (TPHP) were present in low levels in PM with medians of 16, 14, 8.7, and 3.2 ng/m, respectively. In dust, the medians were 1.5E-01, 5.5E-02, 5.9E-01, 8.6E-01, and 8.5E-02 μg/g dw for TCEP, TCPP, TDCPP, TPHP, and 2-ethylhexyl diphenyl phosphate, respectively. The medians of BPA were 6.4E-01 ng/m and 7.4E-02 μg/g dw for PM and dust, respectively. A positive correlation was found between indoor PM and dust in the levels of TCEP (r = 0.85; p = .05). In the individual classroom in this survey, the predominant PFRs were similar, that is, TDCP and TCEP in indoor PM while TPHP and TDCP in dust. TPHP and TCEP in primary schools were obviously lower than those in kindergartens. The estimated daily intakes via PM and dust for all selected PFRs ranged from 1.3E-4 μg/kg/d to 2.0E-02 μg/kg/d, and the value of less than the detection limit at 3.5E-4 μg/kg/d was found for BPA. The EDI values of TPHP in dust non-dietary intake fraction were higher than those in the others. Calculated hazard indices (EDI/RfD) ranged from 4.8E-06 and 5.5E-03, showing that PFRs and BPA in PM and dust presented no health risks to children.
在香港的九所幼儿园和两所小学的室内灰尘和 PM 样本中测量了有机磷阻燃剂 (PFRs) 和双酚 A (BPA)。PM 的平均水平范围为 4.0E+03 ng/m 至 1.5E+04 ng/m。在大多数采样点都检测到 PFRs（PM 中的浓度为 1.5ng/m 至 20ng/m；灰尘中的浓度为 8.0E-02 μg/g dw 至 2.4μg/g dw）和 BPA（PM 中的浓度为 6.4E-01 ng/m 至 1.0ng/m；灰尘中的浓度为 1.0E-02 μg/g dw 至 2.0E-01 μg/g dw）。三-(2-氯乙基)磷酸酯 (TCEP)、三(1,3-二氯-2-丙基)磷酸酯 (TDCP)、三-(氯异丙基)磷酸酯 (TCPP) 和三苯基磷酸酯 (TPHP) 在 PM 中的含量较低，中位数分别为 16、14、8.7 和 3.2ng/m。在灰尘中，TCEP、TCPP、TDCPP、TPHP 和 2-乙基己基二苯基磷酸酯的中位数分别为 1.5E-01、5.5E-02、5.9E-01、8.6E-01 和 8.5E-02μg/g dw。BPA 的中位数分别为 6.4E-01ng/m 和 7.4E-02μg/g dw，用于 PM 和灰尘。室内 PM 和灰尘中 TCEP 的水平呈正相关(r=0.85;p=0.05)。在本调查的个别教室中，主要的 PFRs 相似，即室内 PM 中的 TDCP 和 TCEP 以及灰尘中的 TPHP 和 TDCP。小学的 TPHP 和 TCEP 明显低于幼儿园。通过 PM 和灰尘摄入的所有选定 PFRs 的估计日摄入量范围为 1.3E-4μg/kg/d 至 2.0E-02μg/kg/d，BPA 的摄入量低于检测限 3.5E-4μg/kg/d。灰尘中非饮食摄入分数中 TPHP 的 EDI 值高于其他 PFRs。计算的危害指数 (EDI/RfD) 范围为 4.8E-06 至 5.5E-03，表明 PM 和灰尘中的 PFRs 和 BPA 对儿童没有健康风险。
