Appendix D Food Codes for NHANES - OEHHA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SRP Review Draft Version 2 June, 2012 deposition can be significant (Eisenreich et al., 1981; Kelly et al., 1991). Field studies at Lake Superior, a relatively pristine water body in which organics deposit primarily from atmospheric sources, report HCB in water, sediment and fish tissue samples (Eisenreich et al., 1981). Niimi and Oliver (1989) determined the percent lipid content and HCB concentration in muscle tissue of four salmonid species (brown, lake, and rainbow trout and coho salmon) collected from Lake Ontario. Based on the published water concentration of HCB in Lake Ontario, the researchers calculate a total BAF of 101,333. The total BAF was lipid-normalized based on 4% muscle lipid content in the fish, and adjusted for the concentration of freely dissolved HCB in water, assuming a DOC content of 0.25 mg/L in Lake Ontario from Gobas (1993). The resulting BAF(fd) is 2.6 x 10 6 . We did not adjust the BAF(fd) to the muscle lipid fraction of rainbow trout (0.04) used in the California “Hot Spots” program because it is the same as the fish investigated by Niimi and Oliver (1989). We calculated the freely dissolved HCB fraction in water (0.78) from Eq. H.4 using the national default DOC and POC content of lakes and reservoirs (U.S. EPA, 2003a). A final BAF point estimate of 81,120 (2.6 x 10 6 x 0.04 x 0.78) is recommended for California fish. U.S. EPA (1998) calculates a similar BAF(fd) of log 6.40 (2.5 x 10 6 ) using Lake Ontario whole fish HCB data from Oliver and Niimi (1988). This BAF(fd) is similar to that estimated by Niimi and Oliver (1989) using only the muscle HCB concentration (BAF(fd) = 2.6 x 10 6 ) of the fish presented. U.S. EPA (1998) also calculated a mean log BAF(fd) of 5.70 (5.0 x 10 5 ) derived from BSAF data for HCB. Pereria et al. (1988) and Burkhard et al. (1997) determined a similar log BAF(fd) in the range of 6.03 to 6.68 for bioaccumulation of HCB in small, mostly non-sport fish in estuarine environments. I.2.1.3 Hexachlorocylcohexanes Technical grade hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) generally consists of five isomers, including α-, β-, γ-, δ-, and ε-HCH. α-HCH is the most common isomer in technical grade HCH, and γ-HCH, also known as lindane, is most often isolated and used for its insecticidal action. Consequently, most environmental fate and bioaccumulation studies have investigated the α- and γ-isomers. Lindane is a relatively small MW compound with a short half-life in fish, so rapid equilibrium occurs between the chemical concentration in fish and the water (Oliver and Niimi, 1985). The short half-life is probably a result of its log Kow < 4. The high chlorine content of HCHs prevents metabolism of the isomers by rainbow trout (Konwick et al., 2006). The half-life of lindane in sport-sized fish (11-13 days) is longer than in juvenile fish (about 4 days). However, Geyer et al. (1997) report that α-HCH has a longer halflife of 14.8 days in juvenile rainbow trout. In addition, they observed a positive correlation for fish lipid content and the BCF for lindane. I-11
SRP Review Draft Version 2 June, 2012 The major factor governing residue levels for HCHs appears to be the chemical concentration in the water (Oliver and Niimi, 1985). Thus, good agreement between field BAFs and laboratory BCFs in rainbow trout is achieved. For lindane, the whole-fish laboratory BCF was 1200 and the whole-fish field BAF in Lake Ontario fish was 1000. For α-HCH, the whole-fish laboratory BCF was 1600 and the whole-fish BAF in Lake Ontario fish was 700. In a subsequent comprehensive investigation at Lake Ontario, Oliver and Niimi (1988) report total BAFs for α-HCH and lindane of 5357 and 9333, respectively. The lipidnormalized whole fish BAFs shown in Table I.4 were based on a weighted average lipid content of 11% for the four fish species examined (i.e., brown, lake, and rainbow trout, coho salmon). Normalizing the BAFs to represent the freely dissolved fraction in water based on the national default DOC and POC values for lakes and reservoirs had little effect on the freely dissolved fraction of the HCHs, as chemicals with log Kow < 4 (the lindane and α- HCH log Kows are 3.67 and 3.78, respectively) will not partition significantly to OC. Normalizing the muscle concentration of the HCHs based on the muscle lipid content of rainbow trout (4%) results in point estimate BAFs of 3394 for lindane, and 1948 for α- HCH. Table I.4. BAF Values Based on Lake Ontario Salmonids HCH Isomer Total BAF a BAF(fd) b BAF(rt) c Lindane (γ-HCH) 9333 84,845 3394 α-HCH 5357 48,700 1948 a Total concentration in whole fish divided by the total concentration of chemical in water b Freely dissolved, lipid-normalized concentration based on 11% lipid content in whole fish c BAF point estimates based on muscle lipid content of 4% for sport-sized rainbow trout Niimi and Oliver (1989) determined the percent lipid content and HCH concentrations in muscle tissue, rather than only whole fish (apparently from the same fish examined in their previous study). The HCH concentrations in muscle adjusted for an average muscle lipid content of 4% for rainbow trout are 5.7 and 1.4 µg/kg for α-HCH and lindane, respectively. Using the water concentrations of 2.8 and 0.3 ng/L for α-HCH and lindane, respectively, from Oliver and Niimi (1988) provides BAFs of 2036 (α-HCH) and 4667 (lindane). Because the muscle HCH concentration data in Niimi and Oliver (1989) was at or below the limit of detection for some fish, particularly for lindane, the California BAF point estimate is based on the Oliver and Niimi (1988) data presented in Table I.4. We recommend a BAF(rt) point estimate of 2671 for the “Hot Spots” program, which is the arithmetic average of the muscle tissue BAF(rt)s for the two major HCH isomers in Table I.4. I-12
Page 1 and 2:
SRP Review Draft Version 2 June, 20
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
SRPcientific Review Panel Draft Ver
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Scientific Review Panel Draft Febru
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202: SRP Review Draft Version 2 June, 20
Page 251: SRP Review Draft Version 2 June, 20
Page 279 and 280: Scientific Review PanelSRP Draft Ve
Page 303 and 304:
Scientific Review PanelSRP Draft Ve
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
show all

Appendix D Food Codes for NHANES - OEHHA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?