Thermal paper as a potential source of bisphenol A for humans and the environment: migration and ecotoxicological impact.

The objective of this work was to evaluate thermal paper (TP) tickets used in Argentina as a potential source of bisphenol A (BPA) that could impact humans and the environment. BPA in TP was measured by HPLC ranging from 11.1 to 30.5 mg BPAg-1. In order to estimate the impact on humans, dermal BPA estimated daily intake was calculated as being 79.3 ± 19.5 µgd-1 for workers and 1.6 ± 0.4 µgd-1 for the general population. To evaluate TP's impact on the environment, BPA migration from TP to water and soil was studied. In the case of water, 99.6% of the BPA tickets content migrated in 30 h, while 78.0% moved into the soil in 96 h. BPA degradation kinetics in soil and water were also carried out; while in soil 61.9% of BPA degraded in 120 h, no degradation was observed up to 120 h in tap or river water.Additionally, ecotoxicological effects of BPA on the earthworm Eisenia andrei, a representative terrestrial indicator, were studied performing bioassays on lethality, avoidance, and reproductive and enzymatic activity. BPA showed to be very toxic to E. andrei (LC50 value in contact paper test of 17 µgcm-2, 95% confidence interval 6-46 µgcm-2, 24 h exposure) and also caused an increase of total cocoons for earthworms exposed to 10 and 50 mg BPA kg-1 soil. Evasion response was observed at a concentration of 50 mg BPA kg-1 soil, while no effect was observed on cholinesterases, carboxylesterases, and glutathione S-transferases activities (1, 10, and 50 mg BPA kg-1 soil). Finally, a simple BPA degradation technology using water peroxide and radish (Raphanus sativus) tissue as catalyst was explored as a simple and domestic potential treatment to avoid BPA migration to the environment.

Human exposure and mass balance distribution during procymidone application in horticultural greenhouses.

The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of procymidone application in periurban horticultural greenhouses, especially on workers (applicators and assistants) and soil and plastic mulching, when mechanically pressurized application systems were employed. The mean Potential Dermal Exposure (PDE) was measured using the Whole Body Dosimetry technique. The PDE for the applicators was 188 mL h-1 ± 103 mL h-1, and 14.7 mL h-1 ± 6.3 mL h-1 for the assistants. In the first case, the most exposed body sections were the upper right and left (46.8 mL h-1 ± 23.4 mL h-1; 47.0 mL h-1 ± 23.5 mL h-1) and lower (20.8 mL h-1 ± 10.4 mL h-1; 17.3 mL h-1 ± 8.7 mL h-1) legs, while in the case of assistants, hands and legs were the most impacted limbs. Regarding the Margin of Safety (MOS) during the mix and load stage, two of three pesticide preparations resulted unsafe, while for the applicators, six of six spraying operations were unsafe. For the assistants, five of five operations were safe, but three of them were close to the safety limit. Procymidone distribution between drift (0.03% ± 0.07 %), applicator (0.20% ± 0.15 %), polyethylene mulching (8.5% ± 4.5 %) and soil (3.0% ± 1.1 %) was determined with respect to the total pesticide applied. Procymidone soil impact was also evaluated using Eisenia andrei behavioral tests, finding positive correlations between procymidone application and avoidance and reproduction tests.