Radiation and Environmental Biophysics

, Volume 47, Issue 3, pp 349–357 | Cite as

Reconstruction of 90Sr intake for breast-fed infants in the Techa riverside settlements

  • Evgenia I. TolstykhEmail author
  • Natalia B. Shagina
  • Lyudmila M. Peremyslova
  • Marina O. Degteva
  • Alan W. Phipps
  • John D. Harrison
  • Tim P. Fell
Original Paper


The Techa River (Southern Urals, Russia) was contaminated as a result of radioactive releases by the Mayak plutonium production facility during 1949–1956. The persons born after the onset of the contamination have been identified as the “Techa River Offspring Cohort” (TROC). The TROC has the potential to provide direct data on health effects in progeny that resulted from exposure of a general parent population to chronic radiation. The purpose of the present investigation is the estimation of 90Sr intake from breast milk and river water in the period from birth to 6 months of life, necessary for an infant dose calculation. The investigation is based on all available data concerning radioactive contamination due to global fallouts and Mayak releases in the Southern Urals where extensive radiometric and radiochemical investigations of human tissues and environmental samples were conducted during the second half of the twentieth century. The strontium transfer factor from mother’s daily diet to breast milk was estimated as 0.05 (0.01–0.13) d L−1. Based on this transfer factor and data on 90Sr water contamination, the average total 90Sr intake for an infant born in the middle Techa River region was found to be equal to 60–80 kBq in 1950–1951. For the same period, calculations of 90Sr intake using ICRP models gave values of 70–100 kBq. From 1952 onwards, the differences in intakes calculated using the two approaches increased, reaching a factor of 2–3 in 1953. The Techa River data provide the basis for improving and adapting the ICRP models for application to Techa River-specific population.


River Water Breast Milk Exclusive Breastfeed Transfer Factor Maternal Diet 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work was sponsored by the EU under contract number FP6-516478 (SOUL).


  1. 1.
    Vorobiova MI, Degteva MO, Burmistrov DS, Safronova NG, Kozheurov VP, Anspaugh LR, Napier BA (1999) Review of historical monitoring data on the Techa River contamination. Health Phys 76(6):605–618Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Degteva MO, Vorobiova MI, Kozheurov VP, Tolstykh EI, Anspaugh LR, Napier BA (2000) Dose reconstruction system for the exposed population living along the Techa River. Health Phys 78(5):542–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Degteva MO, Kozheurov VP, Tolstykh EI, Vorobiova MI, Anspaugh LR, Napier BA, Kovtun AN (2000) The Techa River dosimetry system: methods for the reconstruction of internal dose. Health Phys 79(1):24–35Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kossenko MM, Ostroumova Y, Akleyev A, Startsev N, Degteva M, Granath F, Hall P (2000) Mortality in the offspring of individuals living along the radioactively contaminated Techa River: a descriptive analysis. Radiat Environ Biophys 39:219–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tolstykh EI, Zalyapin VI, Krivoschapov VA, Shagina NB, Peremyslova LM, Degteva MO, Kozheurov VP, Safronova NG, Anspaugh LR, Napier BA (2001) Verification of referent-intake levels for strontium-90. Final Report for Milestone 3, Part 1. Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine and University of Utah, Chelyabinsk and Salt Lake CityGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Balonov M, Alexakhin R, Bouville A, Liljinzin JO (2006) Report from the Techa River dosimetry review workshop held on 8–10 December 2003 at the State Research Center Institute of Biophysics, Moscow, Russia. Health Phys 90(2):97–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kozheurov VP, Degteva MO (1994) Dietary intake evaluation and dosimetric modeling for the Techa River residents based on in vivo measurements of strontium-90 in teeth and skeleton. Sci Total Environ 142:63–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zalyapin VI, Krivoshchapov VA, Degteva MO (2002) Numerical analysis of an applied biophysics inverse problem. Inverse Probl Sci Eng 12(4):379–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tolstykh EI, Degteva MO, Vorobiova MI, Kozheurov VP (2001) Fetal dose assessment for the offspring of the Techa Riverside residents. Radiat Environ Biophys 40(4):279–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Degteva MO, Tolstykh EI, Vorobiova MI (2003) Assessment of doses to the offspring of the Techa River Cohort due to intakes of radionuclides by the mother. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 105(1–4):609–614Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jarvis AA, Brown JR, Tiefenbach B (1963) Strontium-89 and strontium-90 levels in breast milk and in mineral-supplement preparations. Can Med Assoc J 88:136–139Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Comar CL (1963) Some overall aspects of strontium-calcium discrimination. In: Wasserman RH (ed) The transfer of calcium and strontium across biological membranes. Academic Press, New York, pp 405–416Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ICRP (2004) Doses to infants from ingestion of radionuclides in mother’s milk. ICRP Publication 95. Annals of the ICRP 34 (3–4), Elsevier Science Ltd, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith TJ, Phipps AW, Fell TP, Harrison JD (2003) Transfer of alkaline earth elements in mothers’ milk and doses from 45Ca, 90Sr and 226Ra. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 105(1–4):273–277Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Phipps AW, Tolstykh EI, Shagina NB, Harrison JD, Degteva MO (2006) The application and adaptation of ICRP internal dosimetry models to the calculation of the bone marrow tissue doses from strontium-90 for epidemiological studies of Techa River populations. Radiats Biol Radioecol 46(5):625–634Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shagina NB, Tolstykh EI, Degteva MO (2003) Improvements in the biokinetic model for strontium with allowance for age and gender differences in bone mineral metabolism. Rad Prot Dosimetry 105(1–4):619–622Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kozheurov VP, Zalyapin VI, Shagina NB, Tokareva EE, Degteva MO, Tolstykh EI, Anspaugh LR, Napier BA (2002) Evaluation of uncertainties in the 90Sr-body-burdens obtained by whole-body counter: application of Bayes’ rule to derive detection limits by analysis of a posteriori data. Appl Radiat Isot 57:525–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shagina NB, Tolstykh EI, Zalyapin VI, Degteva MO, Kozheurov VP, Tokareva EE, Anspaugh LR, Napier BA (2003) Evaluation of age and gender dependences of the rate of strontium elimination 25–45 years after intake: analysis of data from residents living along the Techa River. Radiat Res 159(2):239–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    ICRP (2002) Doses to the embryo and fetus from intakes of radionuclides by the mother. ICRP Publication 88. Annals of the ICRP 31(1–3). Elsevier Science Ltd, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ershow AG, Brown LM, Cantor KP (1991) Intake of tap water and total water by pregnant and lactating women. Am J Public Health 81(3):328–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    DRI (2005) Dietary reference intake for water, potassium, sodium, chloride, and Sulfate. The national academies press, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sichert-Hellert W, Kersting M, Manz F (2001) Fifteen-year trends in water intake in Germany children and adolescents: results of the DONALD Study. Acta Paediatr 90:732–737Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    WHO (1985) Energy and protein requirements: report of an Joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation. WHO Technical Report Series No 724. GenevaGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cross NA, Hillman LS, Allen SH, Krause GF, Vieira NE (1995) Calcium homeostasis and bone metabolism during pregnancy, lactation, and postweaning: a longitudinal study. Am J Clin Nutr 61:514–523Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Krebs NF, Reidinger CJ, Robertson AD, Brenner M (1997) Bone mineral density changes during lactation: maternal dietary, and biochemical correlates. Am J Clin Nutr 65:1738–1746Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kalhan SC (2000) Protein metabolism in pregnancy. Am J Clin Nutr 71:S1249–S1255Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    LINKAGES: Breastfeeding, LAM, Related Complementary Feeding, and Maternal Nutrition Program (2002). Academy for Educational Development (AED) GH/HIDN of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
  28. 28.
    Vorobiova MI, Degteva MO (1999) Simple model for the reconstruction of radionuclide concentrations and radiation exposures along the Techa River. Health Phys 77(2):142–149Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vorobiova MI, Degteva MO, Tolstykh EI, Safronova NG, Peremyslova LM, Anspaugh LR, Napier BA (2003) Verification and evaluation of uncertainties for intake levels for non-strontium radionuclides with use of an improved Techa River model. Final Report for Milestone 5. Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine and University of Utah, Chelyabinsk and Salt Lake CityGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dibobes IK, Panteleyev LI, Zaidman SYa, Skryabin AM, Antropova ZG, Belova EI, Lebedev VM, Meshalkina NG, Peremyslova LM, Pogodin RI (1967) Strontium-90 global fallout in the territory of Urals in 1961–1966. Report of the National Atomic Energy Committee (in Russian). Atomizdat, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Anspaugh LR, Degteva MO, Vasilenko EK (2002) Mayak production association: introduction. Radiat Environ Biophys 41:19–22Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Peremyslova LM (1967) Daily diet intake of calcium and strontium-90 for children younger than one year (in Russian). In: Issues of radiation hygiene, proceedings of third scientific-practical conference on radiation hygiene. Kyiv Publisher, Kyiv, pp 133–136Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    ICRP (1993) Age-dependent doses to members of the public from intake of radionuclides: Part 2, Ingestion dose coefficients. ICRP Publication 67. Annals of the ICRP 23(3/4). Elsevier Science Ltd., OxfordGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lough SA, Hamada GH, Comar CL (1960) Secretion of dietary strontium-90 and calcium in human milk. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 104:194–198Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Versele-de-Clerco H, Gillard-Baruh J (1974) Contamination du lait humain en cesium-137 et strontium-90 en Belgique de 1966 a 1968. J Belge Radiol 57(2):129–135Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Richie LD, Fung EB, Halloran BP, Turnlund JR, Van Loan MD, Cann CC, King JC (1998) A longitudinal study on calcium homeostasis during human pregnancy and lactation and after resumption of menses. Am J Clin Nutr 67:693–671Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Likhtarev IA, Dobroskok IA, Ilyin LA, Krasnoschekova GP, Likhtareva TM, Smirnov BI, Sobolev EP, Shamov VP, Shapiro EL (1975) A study of certain characteristics of strontium metabolism in a homogeneous group of human subjects. Health Phys 28:49–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Snyder WS (1964) Estimates of MPC for occupational exposure to 90Sr, 89Sr, and 85Sr. Health Phys 10:171–182Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Harrison H (1967) Strontium excretion in man. In: Lenihan JMA, Loutit JF, Martin JH (eds) Strontium metabolism. Academic Press, New York, pp 131–138Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Höllriegl V, Li WB, Oeh U (2006) Human biokinetics of stronium-part II: final data evaluation of intestinal absorption and urinary excretion of strontium in human subjects after stable trace administration. Radiat Environ Biophys 45:179–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Apostoaei AI (2002) Absorption of strontium from the gastrointestinal tract into plasma in healthy human adults. Health Phys 83(1):56–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Degteva MO, Kozheurov VP (1994) Age-dependent model for strontium retention in human bone. Rad Prot Dosimetry 53:229–234Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Evgenia I. Tolstykh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Natalia B. Shagina
    • 1
  • Lyudmila M. Peremyslova
    • 1
  • Marina O. Degteva
    • 1
  • Alan W. Phipps
    • 2
  • John D. Harrison
    • 2
  • Tim P. Fell
    • 2
  1. 1.Urals Research Center for Radiation MedicineChelyabinskRussia
  2. 2.Radiation Protection DivisionHealth Protection Agency, CRCEOxonUK

Personalised recommendations