DOCSLIB.ORG

Da UNIVERSIDADE DA BEIRA INTERIOR

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Da UNIVERSIDADE DA BEIRA INTERIOR da UNIVERSIDADE DA BEIRA INTERIOR ANALYSIS OF ORGANOPHOSPHOROUS PESTICIDES IN POSTMORTEM BIOLOGICAL FLUIDS RAQUEL HELENA CARVALHO SILVA RAPOSO Covilhã, 2009 I UNIVERSIDADE DA BEIRA INTERIOR ANALYSIS OF ORGANOPHOSPHOROUS PESTICIDES IN POSTMORTEM BIOLOGICAL FLUIDS Dissertação apresentada à Universidade da Beira Interior para a obtenção do Grau de Mestre em Bioquímica RAQUEL HELENA CARVALHO SILVA RAPOSO Covilhã, 2009 II Trabalho elaborado sob a supervisão e orientação científica do Mestre Mário João Dias, Director do Serviço de Toxicolgia Forense da Delegação Sul do Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal e da Prof. Doutora María Eugenia Gallardo Alba, Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde da Universidade da Beira Interior III TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................... VI List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... VIII Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................ X Abstract................................................................................................................................................... - 1 - Resumo ................................................................................................................................................... - 3 - Justification and Objectives ................................................................................................................. - 5 - I - Literature Review ............................................................................................................................. - 6 - 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... - 7 - 2. Classification and Categorization ............................................................................................... - 8 - 3. Organophosphorous Pesticides .................................................................................................. - 9 - 3.1. Structure ................................................................................................................................. - 9 - 3.2. Physical-Chemical Properties ............................................................................................ - 10 - 3.3. Mechanism of Toxic Action .................................................................................................... 13 3.4. Toxicokinetics ........................................................................................................................... 15 3.4.1. Absorption ........................................................................................................................ 15 3.4.2. Distribution, Metabolism and Excretion ....................................................................... 16 3.5. Toxic Doses and Symptoms .................................................................................................... 17 3.6. Toxic Doses and Treatment .................................................................................................... 18 3.7. Etiology of Pesticide Intoxications ......................................................................................... 19 3.8. Intoxication casuistic in the south region of Portugal ........................................................ 20 4. Legal Background of Pesticide Usage and Management in Portugal ...................................... 21 4.1. European Legislation ............................................................................................................... 22 4.2. Portuguese Legislation ............................................................................................................ 23 4.2.1. Market Introduction ........................................................................................................ 23 4.2.2. Maximum Residue Levels ............................................................................................... 27 4.2.3. Classification, Labeling and Packaging ........................................................................ 28 4.2.4. Seeds treated with plant protection products. ............................................................. 28 4.2.5. Conditions of commercialization and application of plant protection products. ... 29 IV 5. Methodology for the determination of pesticides ....................................................................... 30 II– Experimental ....................................................................................................................................... 49 1. Instrumentation ................................................................................................................................ 50 1.1. Extraction system ..................................................................................................................... 50 1.2. Chromatographic and Detection Systems ............................................................................ 50 2. Material .............................................................................................................................................. 51 2.1. Reagents and Solvents ............................................................................................................. 51 2.2. Standards ................................................................................................................................... 51 2.3. Biological Samples ................................................................................................................... 51 2.4. Working Solutions ................................................................................................................... 52 2.5. Buffer Solutions ........................................................................................................................ 52 3. Chromatographic and detection conditions ................................................................................. 53 4. Extraction procedure ....................................................................................................................... 54 5. Results and Discussion .................................................................................................................... 55 5.1. Identification of Compounds ................................................................................................. 55 5.2. Optimization of the Extraction procedure ............................................................................ 56 6. Validation .......................................................................................................................................... 60 6.1. Selectivity .................................................................................................................................. 60 6.2. Linearity .................................................................................................................................... 65 6.3. Calibration Curves ................................................................................................................... 74 6.4. Limits of detection and quantification .................................................................................. 75 6.5. Intermediate Precision ............................................................................................................. 77 6.6. Repeatability or Intraday Precision ....................................................................................... 78 III – Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 80 IV – References ......................................................................................................................................... 83 V LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 – Structural formula of organophosphorous pesticides. (Casarett, et al, 2001) ........................... - 10 - Figure 2 - Location and Function of Cholinergic Receptors in the Nervous System. (Purves et al, 2004) .... 13 Figure 3 – Symptoms of organophophorus pescitides toxicity. (Abou-Donia, 1992) ...................................... 18 Figure 4 - INML statistics of pesticide intoxications between 2003 and 2006. ................................................. 20 Figure 5 - Detailed statistics of organophosphorous casuistic ........................................................................... 21 Figure 6 – Chromatographic conditions. ............................................................................................................... 54 Figure 7 - Selectivity omethoate (blank sample). ................................................................................................. 62 Figure 8 - Selectivity omethoate (spiked sample). ................................................................................................ 62 Figure 9 - Selectivity diazinon (blank sample)...................................................................................................... 62 Figure 10- Selectivity diazinon (spiked sample). .................................................................................................. 62 Figure 11
Load more

Recommended publications
  • INCORPORATING LOW-DOSE EPIDEMIOLOGY DATA in a CHLORPYRIFOS RISK ASSESSMENT Julie E
    Dose-Response: An International Journal Volume 11 | Issue 2 Article 8 6-2013 INCORPORATING LOW-DOSE EPIDEMIOLOGY DATA IN A CHLORPYRIFOS RISK ASSESSMENT Julie E. Goodman Gradient, Cambridge, MA Robyn L. Prueitt Gradient, Cambridge, MA Lorenz R. Rhomberg Gradient, Cambridge, MA Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dose_response Recommended Citation Goodman, Julie E.; Prueitt, Robyn L.; and Rhomberg, Lorenz R. (2013) "INCORPORATING LOW-DOSE EPIDEMIOLOGY DATA IN A CHLORPYRIFOS RISK ASSESSMENT," Dose-Response: An International Journal: Vol. 11 : Iss. 2 , Article 8. Available at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dose_response/vol11/iss2/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dose-Response: An International Journal by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Goodman et al.: Low-Dose Epidemiology Data in a Chlorpyrifos Risk Assessment Dose-Response, 11:207–219, 2013 Formerly Nonlinearity in Biology, Toxicology, and Medicine Copyright © 2013 University of Massachusetts ISSN: 1559-3258 DOI: 10.2203/dose-response.12-022.Goodman INCORPORATING LOW-DOSE EPIDEMIOLOGY DATA IN A CHLORPYRIFOS RISK ASSESSMENT Julie E. Goodman, Robyn L. Prueitt, and Lorenz R. Rhomberg ᮀ Gradient, Cambridge, MA ᮀ USEPA assessed whether epidemiology data suggest that fetal or early-life chlorpyrifos exposure causes neurodevelopmental effects and, if so, whether they occur at exposures below those causing the current most sensitive endpoint, 10% inhibition of blood acetyl- cholinesterase (AChE). We previously conducted a hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence analysis and found that a proposed causal association between chlorpyrifos exposure and neurodevelopmental effects in the absence of AChE inhibition does not have a substantial basis in existing animal or in vitro studies, and there is no plausible basis for invoking such effects in humans at their far lower exposure levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Mother/Child Organophosphate and Pyrethroid Distributions T ⁎ Natalia Bravoa, Joan O
    Environment International 134 (2020) 105264 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Environment International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envint Mother/child organophosphate and pyrethroid distributions T ⁎ Natalia Bravoa, Joan O. Grimalta, , Darja Mazejb, Janja Snoj Tratnikb,c, Dimosthenis Andreas Sarigiannisd, Milena Horvatb,c a Institute of Environmental Assessment and Water Research (IDAEA-CSIC), Department of Environmental Chemistry, Jordi Girona, 18, 08034 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain b Department of Environmental Sciences, Jožef Stefan Institute, Jamova cesta 39, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia c International Postgraduate School Jožef Stefan, Jamova cesta 39, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia d Environmental Engineering Laboratory, Department of Chemical Engineering and HERACLES Research Centre on the Exposome and Health, Centre for Interdisciplinary Research and Innovation, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki University Campus, Bldg. D, Rm 201, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Handling Editor: Adrian Covaci The present study reports one of the few cases in which organophosphate (OP) and pyrethroid (PYR) pesticide Keywords: human exposure is evaluated in family contexts by the analysis of mother/child pair samples. Urinary con- Organophosphorus pesticides centrations of 6 organic metabolites of organophosphates and 2 pyrethroids were measured in mothers and their Pyrethroids 7-to 8-year-old children (n = 168) in a general population from the central area of Slovenia. The results were Human Biomonitoring adjusted for specific gravity and creatinine. Children The most abundant OP metabolite in children was 4-nitrophenol (PNP) (median 0.7 ng/ml) and in mothers Women (0.45 ng/ml), representing parathion exposure. 3-Phenoxibenzoic acid (3-PBA) (0.26 ng/ml), the general me- Child-mother pairs tabolite of pyrethroids, and 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCPY) (0.16 ng/ml; chlorpyriphos) were the second most abundant compounds in children and mothers, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimation of Daily Intake and Risk Assessment of Organophosphorus Pesticides Based on Biomonitoring Data
    Food and Chemical Toxicology 123 (2019) 57–71 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Food and Chemical Toxicology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foodchemtox Review Estimation of daily intake and risk assessment of organophosphorus T pesticides based on biomonitoring data – The internal exposure approach Ioanna Katsikantamia,b, Claudio Colosioc, Athanasios Alegakisb, Manolis N. Tzatzarakisb, ∗ Elena Vakonakib, Apostolos K. Rizosa, Dimosthenis A. Sarigiannisd,e,f, Aristides M. Tsatsakisb, a Department of Chemistry, University of Crete, Foundation for Research and Technology-Hellas, FORTH-IESL, GR-71003, Heraklion, Crete, Greece b Laboratory of Toxicology, Medical School, University of Crete, GR-71003, Heraklion, Crete, Greece c Department of Occupational and Environmental Health of the University of Milan, International Centre for Rural Health of the University Hospital San Paolo, S. Paolo Hospital Unit, Via San Vigilio 43, 20142 Milan, Italy d Environmental Engineering Laboratory, Department of Chemical Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece e HERACLES Research Centre on the Exposome and Health, Centre for Interdisciplinary Research and Innovation (KEDEK), Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece f Environmental Health Engineering, Institute for Advanced Study IUSS, Pavia, Italy ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Human exposure to pesticides can be estimated through different approaches. The approach adopted in this Biomonitoring study is based on internal dose measures. Studies published during 2001 and 2017 were collected from PubMed Dialkyl phosphates and Scopus databases, filtered and organized. The intake of parent compounds is estimated based on theurinary Estimated daily intake excretion of different OP metabolites applying a mathematical model previously used for similar purposes. Once Health effects defined an Estimated Daily Intake (EDI), risk assessment is performed through comparison with specific Organophosphorus pesticides guideline values and hazard index (HI) is calculated to assess cumulative health risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter 2007–2008
    Pesticides and You News from Beyond Pesticides: Protecting Health and the Environment with Science, Policy and Action Volume 27, Number 4 Winter 2007-2008 Facing Scientifi c Realities, Debunking the “Dose Makes the Poison” Myth How Safe is Your Bait? Pesticides May Be Labeled as “Nonvolatile,” But Still Release Poisons into the Air Grounding out Grubs: Managing grubs with prevention and least-toxic strategies The Secret History of the War on Cancer Letter from Washington Danger at (Really) Low Dose Mo�vates changes that reject the use of toxic chemicals arm resul�ng from really low dose exposure to toxic chemicals can be measured in the air, with the excep�on of boric acid, which is now accepted in scien�fic circles. However, the pes�cide is commonly found in bait formula�ons. With the science on low Hregulatory process s�ll does not reflect the science, nor does level exposure and poten�al adverse impact, we know why there it comply with a 1996 statutory requirement that the agency have ought to be concern, especially when the chemical is placed for long in place by now a protocol for evalua�ng pes�cides that may be periods in and around the perimeter of a room in a sealed indoor endocrine disruptors, known to wreak havoc at miniscule doses in environment. Our ar�cle sheds some important light on this topic. developing organ systems. More data emerges year by year. When we do not have all the answers Lab experiments link exposure to brain effects This discussion adds important weight to the already heavy support In this issue of PAY, we print a talk given by Warren Porter, Ph.D., for the precau�onary approach to pest management.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Urine Preservation Methods and Duration of Storage on Measured Levels of Environmental Contaminants
    Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (2006) 16, 39–48 r 2006 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 1559-0631/06/$30.00 www.nature.com/jes Impact of urine preservation methods and duration of storage on measured levels of environmental contaminants JANE A. HOPPIN,a ROSS ULMER,b ANTONIA M. CALAFAT,c DANA B. BARR,c SUSAN V. BAKER,d HELLE M. MELTZERe AND KJERSTI S. RØNNINGENe aEpidemiology Branch, NIEHS, NIH, DHHS, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA bWestat, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA cNational Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, DHHS, Atlanta, Georgia, USA dCODA Research, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA eNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway Collection of urine samples in human studies involves choices regarding shipping, sample preservation, and storage that may ultimately influence future analysis. As more studies collect and archive urine samples to evaluate environmental exposures in the future, we were interested in assessing the impact of urine preservative, storage temperature, and time since collection on nonpersistent contaminants in urine samples. In spiked urine samples stored in three types of urine vacutainers (no preservative, boric acid, and chlorhexidine), we measured five groups of contaminants to assess the levels of these analytes at five time points (0, 24, 48, and 72 h, and 1 week) and at two temperatures (room temperature and 41C). The target chemicals were bisphenol A (BPA), metabolites of organophosphate (OP), carbamate, and pyrethroid insecticides, chlorinated phenols, and phthalate monoesters, and were measured using five different mass spectrometry-based methods. Three samples were analyzed at each time point, with the exception of BPA.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A: Metabolism
    DRAFT Appendix A: Metabolism August 21, 2008 Prepared by: Health Effects Division Office of Pesticide Programs US Environmental Protection Agency Page 1 of 82 DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction. ............................................................................................................ 5 2. Metabolism in Adult Animals................................................................................... 7 3. In Vitro Metabolism of Chlorpyrifos ....................................................................... 14 3.1. Cytochrome P450 (The CYP Enzymes)........................................................ 14 3.2. The PON1 Enzyme....................................................................................... 24 3.3. B-Esterases (Carboxylesterases) ................................................................. 27 3.4. Glutathione S-transferases ........................................................................... 28 3.5. KIAA1363 – A Mouse Brain Enzyme ............................................................ 31 3.6. Role of Butyrylcholinesterase in Chlorpyrifos Metabolism ............................ 32 4. Metabolism in Neonatal Animals........................................................................... 33 4.1. Metabolism and Toxicokinetic Studies in Pregnant Dams, Fetuses, and Post- Natal Pups .................................................................................................... 33 4.2. Gestational Exposure (GD14-18): Measurement of TCP in rat maternal and fetal brain and
    [Show full text]
  • Biomarker Review and Development Strategy.Pdf
    INTARESE Project No. 018385 INTARESE Integrated Assessment of Health Risks of Environmental Stressors in Europe Integrated Project Thematic Priority Deliverable 20: Biomarker review and development strategy (WP 2.2) Due date of deliverable: 05/2007 Actual submission date: 06/2007 Start Date of Project: 1 November 2005 Duration: 60 Months Organisation name of lead contractor for this deliverable: VITO Revision: Final version Project co-funded by the European Commission with the Sixth Framework Programme (2002- 2006) Dissemination Level PU Public PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services) RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services) CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services Table of content 1 A brief introduction to human biomonitoring ............................................................... 2 2 Alkylphenols ............................................................................................................... 7 3 Alpha1-microglobulin (α1-m) ..................................................................................... 20 4 Arsenic ...................................................................................................................... 23 5 β2-microglobulin (β2-m) ............................................................................................ 34 6 Bisphenol A .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • EURL-SRM - Analytical Observations Report Concerning the Following…
    EURL-SRM - Analytical Observations Report concerning the following… o Compound(s): Carbofuran, Benfuracarb, Carbosulfan, Furathiocarb, 3-Hydroxy-Carbofuran o Commodities: Various commodities of plant origin o Method(s): QuEChERS followed by a hydrolysis step o Instrumentation: LC-MS/MS Analysis of Carbofuran (sum) by applying hydrolysis on QuEChERS extracts Reported by: EURL-SRM Version 1 (last update: 20.04.2016) Background information / Initial Observations: Carbofuran (CF) is an insecticide, nematicide and acaricide of the carbamate group. Carbosulfan (CS), furathiocarb (FT) and benfuracarb (BF) are pro-pesticides that degrade to CF, which is the active substance. To account for the high acute neurotoxicity of CF very low toxicological reference values were allocated in 2009 (ARfD 0.00015 mg/kg bw)1 [2]. The metabolite 3-OH-carbofuran (3-OH-CF) was considered exhibiting similar toxicity as the parent. Originally CS, BF and FT were regulated separately from CF and its metabolite 3-OH-CF. The separate MRLs of CS and BF were, however, difficult to enforce as these two compounds are highly susceptible to degradation during extraction and extract storage, especially where the pH of the matrix is low. For this reason, the QuEChERS protocol (EN-15662) foresees not acidifying the extracts after cleanup by dispersive SPE with PSA, to minimize losses between extraction and measurement. But even then, further losses are expected during sample milling, sample extraction (especially in acidic commodities prior to buffering) or storage of homogenates, especially if pH is low and temperatures high. In 2012 the MRLs of CF, BF, CS and FT for most products were lowered to their respective consensus LOQ at that time2.
    [Show full text]
  • And Zero-Valent Iron-Activated Persulfate Oxidation of 3,5,6-Trichloro-2-Pyridinol in an Aquatic System
    University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2019 Thermo- and Zero-Valent Iron-Activated Persulfate Oxidation of 3,5,6-Trichloro-2-pyridinol in an Aquatic System Roaa Mogharbel University of Central Florida Part of the Chemistry Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Doctoral Dissertation (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Mogharbel, Roaa, "Thermo- and Zero-Valent Iron-Activated Persulfate Oxidation of 3,5,6-Trichloro-2-pyridinol in an Aquatic System" (2019). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 6614. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/6614 THERMO- AND ZERO-VALENT IRON-ACTIVATED PERSULFATE OXIDATION OF 3,5,6-TRICHLORO-2-PYRIDINOL IN AN AQUATIC SYSTEM by ROAA MOGHARBEL B.S. Taibah University, Saudi Arabia, 2008 M.Sc. Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, 2013 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of the Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Chemistry in the College of Sciences at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Fall Term 2018 Major Professor: Cherie L. Yestrebsky © 2018 Roaa Mogharbel ii ABSTRACT The compound 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCPy), a metabolite of the broad-spectrum organophosphorous insecticide chlorpyrifos, is both more persistent and more water soluble than its parent compound. This difference, which allows TCPy to more readily leach into surface water and groundwater, has led to widespread contamination of TCPy in soils and aquatic environments.
    [Show full text]
  • A Longitudinal Investigation of Selected Pesticide Metabolites in Urine
    Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology (1999) 9,494 ± 501 # 1999 StocktonPress All rights reserved 1053-4245/99/$12.00 http://www.stockton-press.co.uk A longitudinal investigation of selected pesticide metabolites in urine DAVID L. MACINTOSH,a LARRY L. NEEDHAM,b KAREN A. HAMMERSTROMc AND P. BARRY RYANd aDepartment of Environmental Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA bNational Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA cNational Center for Environmental Assessment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. dRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA As part of a longitudinal investigation of environmental exposures to selected chemical contaminants, concentrations of the pesticide metabolites 1-naphthol (1NAP), 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCPY), malathion dicarboxylic acid (MDA), and atrazine mercapturate (AM) were measured in repeated samples obtained from 80 individuals in Maryland during 1995±1996. Up to six urine samples were collected from each individual at intervals of approximately 8 weeks over a 1-year period (i.e., one sample per participant in each of six cycles). 1NAP (median=4.2 g/l and 3.3 g/g creatinine) and TCPY (median=5.3 g/l and 4.6. g/g creatinine) were present in over 80% of the samples, while MDA and AM were detected infrequently (6.6% and <1% of samples, respectively). Geometric mean (GM) concentrations of 1NAP in urine did not vary significantly among sampling cycles. In contrast, GM concentrationsof TCPY were significantly greater in samples collected during the spring and summer of 1996 than in the preceding fall and winter.
    [Show full text]
  • Blood Pharmacokinetic of 17 Common Pesticides in Mixture Following a Single Oral Exposure in Rats: Implications for Human Biomonitoring and Exposure Assessment
    Archives of Toxicology (2019) 93:2849–2862 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-019-02546-y TOXICOGENOMICS Blood pharmacokinetic of 17 common pesticides in mixture following a single oral exposure in rats: implications for human biomonitoring and exposure assessment Caroline Chata1,2 · Paul Palazzi1 · Nathalie Grova1 · Serge Haan3 · Claude Emond1,4 · Michel Vaillant5 · Brice M. R. Appenzeller1 Received: 3 May 2019 / Accepted: 14 August 2019 / Published online: 19 August 2019 © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 Abstract Human biomonitoring provides information about chemicals measured in biological matrices, but their interpretation remains uncertain because of pharmacokinetic (PK) interactions. This study examined the PKs in blood from Long–Evans rats after a single oral dose of 0.4 mg/kg bw of each pesticide via a mixture of the 17 pesticides most frequently measured in humans. These pesticides are β-endosulfan; β-hexachlorocyclohexane [β-HCH]; γ-hexachlorocyclohexane [γ-HCH]; carbofuran; chlorpyrifos; cyhalothrin; cypermethrin; diazinon; dieldrin; difufenican; fpronil; oxadiazon; pentachlorophenol [PCP]; permethrin; 1,1-dichloro-2,2bis(4-chlorophenyl)ethylene [p,p′-DDE]; 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)ethane [p,p′- DDT]; and trifuralin. We collected blood at 10 min to 48-h timepoints in addition to one sample before gavage (for a control). We used GS–MS/MS to measure the pesticide (parents and major metabolites) concentrations in plasma, determined the PK parameters from 20 sampling timepoints, and analyzed the food, litter, and cardboard in the rats’ environment for pesticides. We detected many parents and metabolites pesticides in plasma control (e.g., diethyl phosphate [DEP]; PCP; 3-phenoxyben- zoic acid [3-PBA]; 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol [TCPy], suggesting pre-exposure contamination.
    [Show full text]
  • Late-Breaking Supplement
    2017 Annual Meeting Abstract Supplement LATE-BREAKING ABSTRACT SUBMISSIONS These abstracts are available via the Mobile Event App, Online Planner, and a downloadable PDF from the SOT website. All Late-Breaking Abstracts are presented on Thursday, March 16, from 8:30 am–11:45 am. www.toxicology.org THURSDAY POSTER SESSION MAP March 16, 2017—8:30 AM to 11:45 AM—Hall A Poster Set Up—7:30 AM to 8:30 AM Late-Breaking Poster #s: P196-P540 (highlighted in gray) P540 P539 P538 P537 P533 P534 P535 P536 P532 P531 P530 P529 P528 P527 P526 P525 P524 P523 P522 P521 P520 P519 P518 P517 P516 P515 P497 P498 P499 P500 P501 P502 P503 P504 P505 P506 P507 P508 P509 P510 P511 P512 P513 P514 P496 P495 P494 P493 P492 P491 P490 P489 P488 P487 P486 P485 P484 P483 P482 P481 P480 P479 P461 P462 P463 P464 P465 P466 P467 P468 P469 P470 P471 P472 P473 P474 P475 P476 P477 P478 P460 P459 P458 P457 P456 P455 P454 P453 P452 P451 P450 P449 P448 P447 P446 P445 P444 P443 P425 P426 P427 P428 P429 P430 P431 P432 P433 P434 P435 P436 P437 P438 P439 P440 P441 P442 P424 P423 P422 P421 P420 P419 P418 P417 P416 P415 P414 P413 P412 P411 P410 P409 P408 P407 P389 P390 P391 P392 P393 P394 P395 P396 P397 P398 P399 P400 P401 P402 P403 P404 P405 P406 P388 P387 P386 P385 P384 P383 P382 P381 P380 P379 P378 P377 P376 P375 P374 P373 P372 P371 P353 P354 P355 P356 P357 P358 P359 P360 P361 P362 P363 P364 P365 P366 P367 P368 P369 P370 P352 P351 P350 P349 P348 P347 P346 P345 P344 P343 P342 P341 P340 P339 P338 P337 P336 P335 P317 P318 P319 P320 P321 P322 P323 P324 P325 P326 P327 P328 P329 P330 P331
    [Show full text]