Environmental Geochemistry and Health

, Volume 31, Supplement 1, pp 85–92 | Cite as

Arsenic distribution and bioaccessibility across particle fractions in historically contaminated soils

Original Paper

Abstract

Incidental soil ingestion is a common contaminant exposure pathway for humans, notably children. It is widely accepted that the inclusion of total soil metal concentrations greatly overestimates the risk through soil ingestion for people due to contaminant bioavailability constraints. The assumption also assumes that the contaminant distribution and the bioaccessible fraction is consistent across all particle sizes. In this study, we investigated the distribution of arsenic across five particle size fractions as well as arsenic bioaccessibility in the <250-, <100-, <10- and 2.5-μm soil particle fractions in 50 contaminated soils. The distribution of arsenic was generally uniform across the larger particle size fractions but increased markedly in the <2.5-μm soil particle fraction. The marked increase in arsenic concentration in the <2.5-μm fraction was associated with a marked increase in the iron content. Arsenic bioaccessibility, in contrast, increased with decreasing particle size. The mean arsenic bioaccessibility increased from 25 ± 16% in the <250-μm soil particle fraction to 42 ± 23% in the <10-μm soil particle fraction. These results indicate that the assumption of static arsenic bioaccessibility values across particle size fractions should be reconsidered if the ingested material is enriched with small particle fractions such as those found in household dust.

Keywords

Arsenic Particle size Contamination Risk assessment Dust Soil Bioaccessibility 

References

  1. Basta, N. T., Rodriguez, R. R., & Casteel, S. W. (2001). Bioavailability and risk of arsenic exposure by the soil ingestion pathway. In W. T. Frankenberger Jr. (Ed.), Environmental chemistry of arsenic. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
  2. Belluck, D. A., Benjamin, S. L., Baveye, P., Sampson, J., & Johnson, B. (2003). Widespread arsenic contamination of soils in residential areas and public spaces: An emerging regulatory or medical crisis? International Journal of Toxicology, 22, 109–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bright, D. A., Richardson, G. M., & Dodd, M. (2006). Do current standards of practice in Canada measure what is relevant to human exposure at contaminated sites? I: A discussion of soil particle size and contaminant partitioning in soil. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 12, 591–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cai, Y., Cabrera, J. C., Georgiadis, M., & Jayachandran, K. (2002). Assessment of arsenic mobility in the soils of some golf courses in South Florida. The Science of the Total Environment, 291, 123–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Duggan, M. J., Inskip, M. J., Rundle, S. A., & Moorcroft, J. S. (1985). Lead in playground dust and on the hands of schoolchildren. The Science of the Total Environment, 44, 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Edwards, R. D., Yurkow, E. J., & Lioy, P. J. (1998). Seasonal deposition of housedusts onto household surfaces. The Science of the Total Environment, 224, 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ellice, M. C., Dowling, K., Smith, J., Smith, E., & Naidu, R. (2001). Abandoned mine tailings with high arsenic concentrations: A case study with implications for regional Victoria. In Proceedings of arsenic in the Asia-Pacific region: Managing arsenic for our future (p. 124), 20–23 Nov 2001, Adelaide, South Australia.Google Scholar
  8. Gee, G. W., & Bauder, J. W. (1986). Particle-size analysis. In Klute, A. (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis. Part 1. Agronomy Monograph 9 (2nd ed., pp. 383–411). Madison, WI: ASA and SSSA.Google Scholar
  9. Hund-Rinke, K., & Kördel, W. (2003). Underlying issues in bioaccessibility and bioavailability: Experimental methods. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 56, 52–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hunt, A., Johnson, D. L., Thornton, I., & Watt, J. M. (1993). Apportioning the sources of lead in house dusts in the London Borough of Richmond, England. The Science of the Total Environment, 138, 183–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Juhasz, A. L., Smith, E., Weber, J., Rees, M., Rofe, A., Kuchel, T., et al. (2007a). Comparison of in vivo and in vitro methodologies for the assessment of arsenic bioavailability in contaminated coils. Chemosphere, 69, 961–966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Juhasz, A. L., Smith, E., Weber, J., Rees, M., Rofe, A., Kuchel, T., et al. (2007b). In vitro assessment of arsenic bioaccessibility in contaminated (anthropogenic and geogenic) soils. Chemosphere, 69, 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kelley, M. E., Brauning, S. E., Schoof, R. A., & Ruby, M. V. (2002). Assessing oral bioavailability of metals in soil. Columbus, OH: Battelle Press.Google Scholar
  14. Laird, B. D., van de Wiele, T. R., Corriveau, M., Jamieson, H. E., Parsons, M. B., Verstraete, W., et al. (2007). Gastrointestinal microbes increase arsenic bioaccessibility of ingested mine tailings using the simulator of the human intestinal microbial system. Environmental Science & Technology, 41, 5542–5547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lanphear, B. P., & Roghmann, K. L. (1997). Pathways of lead exposure in urban children. Environmental Research, 74, 67–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lien, H. C., Tsai, T. F., Lee, Y. Y., & Hsiao, C. H. (2001). Merkel cell carcinoma and chronic arsenicism. Journal of American Academy of Dermatology, 41, 641–643.Google Scholar
  17. Lioy, P. J., Freeman, N. C. G., & Millette, J. R. (2002). Dust: A metric for use in residential and building exposure assessment and source characterization. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110, 969–983.Google Scholar
  18. Lombi, E., Sletten, R. S., & Wenzel, W. W. (2000). Sequentially extracted arsenic from different size fractions of contaminated soils. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 124, 319–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mandal, B. K., & Suzuki, K. T. (2002). Arsenic round the world: A review. Talanta, 58, 201–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McLaren, R. G., Naidu, R., Smith, J., & Tiller, K. G. (1998). Fractionation and distribution of arsenic in soils contaminated by cattle dip. Journal of Environment Quality, 27, 348–354.Google Scholar
  21. Mukerjee, D. (1998). Assessment of risk from multimedia exposures of children to environmental chemicals. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 48, 483–501.Google Scholar
  22. NEPC (National Environmental Protection Council). (1999). National environmental protection measure for the assessment of site contamination, Schedule B1 (pp. 1–12). Adelaide, Australia: National Environmental Protection Council Service Corporation.Google Scholar
  23. Pouschat, P., & Zagury, G. J. (2006). In vitro gastrointestinal bioavailability of arsenic in soils collected near CCA-treated utility poles. Environmental Science & Technology, 40, 4317–4323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roberts, S. M. (2004). Incorporating information on bioavailability of soil-bourne chemicals into human health risk assessments. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 10, 631–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rodriguez, R., Basta, N. T., Casteel, S. W., & Pace, L. W. (1999). An in vitro gastrointestinal method to estimate bioavailable arsenic in contaminated soil and solid media. Environmental Science & Technology, 33, 642–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rodriguez, R. E., Basta, N. T., Ward, D. C., Casteel, S. W., & Pace, L. W. (2003). Chemical extraction methods to assess bioavailable As in contaminated soil and solid media. Journal of Environment Quality, 32, 876–884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ruby, M. V. (2004). Bioavailability of soil-borne chemicals: Abiotic assessment tools. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 10, 647–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ruby, M. V., Davis, A., Schoof, R., Eberle, S., & Sellstone, C. M. (1996). Estimation of lead and arsenic bioavailability using a physiologically based extraction test. Environmental Science & Technology, 30, 422–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Simon, D. L., Maynard, E. J., & Thomas, K. D. (2007). Living in a sea of lead—changes in blood- and hand-lead of infants living near a smelter. Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, 17, 248–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Smith, E., Naidu, R., & Alston, A. M. (1999). Chemistry of arsenic in soils: I. Sorption of arsenate and arsenite by four Australian soils. Journal of Environment Quality, 28, 1719–1726.Google Scholar
  31. Smith, E., Naidu, R., & Alston, A. M. (2002). Chemistry of inorganic arsenic in soils: II. Effect of P, Na and Ca. Journal of Environment Quality, 31, 557–563.Google Scholar
  32. Smith, E., Smith, J., Smith, L., Biswas, T., Correll, R., & Naidu, R. (2003). Arsenic in Australian environment: An overview. Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part A, A38, 223–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith, E., Smith, J., & Naidu, R. (2006). Distribution and nature of arsenic along former railway corridors of South Australia. The Science of the Total Environment, 363, 175–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smith, E., Naidu, R., Weber, J., & Juhasz, A. L. (2008). The impact of sequestration on the bioaccessibility of arsenic in long-term contaminated soils. Chemosphere, 71, 773–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Subacz, J. L., Barnett, M. O., Jardine, P. M., & Stewart, M. A. (2007). Decreasing arsenic bioaccessibility/bioavailability in soils with iron amendments. Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part A, 42, 1317–1329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tang, X. Y., Zhu, Y. G., Shan, X. Q., McLaren, R., & Duan, J. (2007). The ageing effect on bioaccessibility and fractionation of arsenic in soils from China. Chemosphere, 66, 1183–1190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yamamoto, N., Takahashi, Y., Yoshinaga, J., Tanaka, A., & Shibata, Y. (2006). Size distributions of soil particles adhered to children’s hands. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 51, 157–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yang, J. K., Barnett, M. O., Jardine, P. M., Basta, N. T., & Casteel, S. W. (2002). Adsorption, sequestration, and bioaccessibility of As(V) in soils. Environmental Science & Technology, 36, 4562–4569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Environmental Risk Assessment and RemediationUniversity of South AustraliaMawson LakesAustralia
  2. 2.CRC for Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the EnvironmentMawson LakesAustralia

Personalised recommendations