Chatfield Technical Consulting Limited, 2071 Dickson Road, Mississauga, L5B 1Y8, Ontario, Canada.
Environ Res. 2023 Aug 1;230:114529. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.114529. Epub 2023 Mar 23.
The respirable fractions from 46 different crushed amphibole samples were separated by water elutriation. The dimensions of approximately 200 elongate mineral particles (EMPs) longer than 5 μm in each of these fractions were measured by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The data were used to address three questions: 1. Can amphiboles be classified on a scale that represents the level of inhalation hazard they present? 2. Can prismatic amphibole be discriminated from amphibole asbestos on the basis of EMP size distributions and concentration measurements? 3. How do different exposure indices (Phase Contrast Microscopy Equivalent (PCME), Berman & Crump protocol fibers, Chatfield extra-criteria EMPs) compare when applied to these amphibole samples? For each sample, the number of respirable EMPs longer than 5 μm per gram of respirable dust and the number of extra-criteria EMPs per gram of respirable dust were calculated. The number of respirable EMPs longer than 5 μm per gram of respirable dust and the proportion of those with dimensions associated with mesothelioma in animal studies were considered to be contributors to the inhalation hazard presented by amphibole dust. In addition to these concentration measurements, the median EMP width, median aspect ratio and the aspect ratio geometric standard deviation (GSD) were considered to be relevant parameters in discriminating prismatic amphibole from asbestiform amphibole. A plot of the aspect ratio GSD against either the concentration of respirable EMPs per gram of respirable dust, the median aspect ratio or the median width allowed discrimination. The data showed a close correspondence between exposures in terms of Chatfield extra-criteria EMPs and Berman and Crump protocol structures for all of the amphibole samples. However, although for commercial asbestos varieties exposures in terms of PCME fibers were comparable to those of the other two metrics, they greatly exceeded those for non-asbestiform amphiboles.
从 46 个不同粉碎角闪石样本中分离出可吸入部分,然后通过水淘析法分离。对各样本中长度大于 5μm 的大约 200 个长形矿物颗粒(EMP)的尺寸,采用透射电子显微镜(TEM)进行测量。利用这些数据来解答三个问题:1. 能否按照吸入危害程度对角闪石进行分类?2. 能否根据 EMP 尺寸分布和浓度测量值区分棱柱形角闪石和角闪石石棉?3. 当应用于这些角闪石样本时,不同的暴露指数(相衬显微镜等效物(PCME)、Berman 和 Crump 方案纤维、Chatfield 额外标准 EMP)如何比较?对于每个样本,计算每克可吸入粉尘中长度大于 5μm 的可吸入 EMP 数量和每克可吸入粉尘中超出标准的 EMP 数量。每克可吸入粉尘中长度大于 5μm 的可吸入 EMP 数量以及动物研究中与间皮瘤相关的那些 EMP 尺寸的比例被认为是角闪石粉尘吸入危害的促成因素。除了这些浓度测量值外,还考虑 EMP 宽度中位数、长宽比中位数和长宽比几何标准偏差(GSD),作为区分棱柱形角闪石和石棉形角闪石的相关参数。将长宽比 GSD 与每克可吸入粉尘中可吸入 EMP 浓度、长宽比中位数或宽度中位数作图,可进行区分。数据表明,所有角闪石样本的 Chatfield 额外标准 EMP 和 Berman 和 Crump 方案结构的暴露情况密切相关。然而,尽管对于商业石棉品种,PCME 纤维的暴露量与其他两个指标相当,但它们大大超过了非石棉形角闪石的暴露量。