Abstract
Personal air exposure to monocyclic aromatic amines (MAA) is a growing concern, in large part, due to their ubiquitous presence in the general environment and their potential health risk for bladder cancer. It is unclear what other sources of airborne MAA are for general population, due to low concentrations in the air. Detecting “trace” levels of MAAs requires a sensitive analytical method and field evaluation. In this study, an analytical method was developed to detect 2,3-dimethylaniline [2,3-DMA]; 3,5-DMA; and 3-ethylaniline [3-EA] in general air environment. During a 12-hr sampling periods, the estimated limit of quantifications (LOQs) were less than 4.13 ng/m 3 for 2,3-DMA; 3,5-DMA; and 3-EA. Desorption efficiencies (recovery rates) were at least 89% with 1 ng of each 2,3-DMA; 3,5-DMA; and 3-EA per tube. The storage effect for three MAAs showed that all three MAAs remained above 60% on the sorbent tubes and filters over 10 days. A field study was conducted in Seoul, Korea to validate sampling method in a real-world busy street with traffic, an office near the same street, and a residential home away from the busy street. Gas-phase 2,3-DMA was detected only in the indoor home sample (3.26±0.60 ng/m 3 ), and 3,5-DMA was not detected in all samples. Particle-bound 3-EA was detected in the street (10.92±4.73 ng/m 3 ), office (9.47±6.11 ng/m 3 ), and residential home (7.53±4.17 ng/m 3 ). The results suggested that the proposed analytical and field sampling methods can useful for environmental exposure assessment of these MAAs.
Highlights
The health effects of 2,3-dimethylaniline (2,3-DMA); 3,5-dimethylaniline (3,5-DMA); and 3-ethylaniline (3-EA), a class of aromatic amines (AAs), are a growing concern due to their similar chemical structures to carcinogens such as aniline and 2,6-dimethylaniline (Gan et al, 2004; Skipper et al, 2006)
The estimated limit of quantifications (LOQs) ranged between 0.46-2.06 ng/m3 for 3-EA; 3.21-4.13 ng/m3 for 3,5-DMA; and 1.83-2.25 ng/m3 for 2,3-DMA
We have developed a sensitive analytical method to measure airborne 3-EA; 2,3-DMA; and 3,5-DMA and evaluated the feasibility of measuring these AA compounds in a real-world urban environment
Summary
The health effects of 2,3-dimethylaniline (2,3-DMA); 3,5-dimethylaniline (3,5-DMA); and 3-ethylaniline (3-EA), a class of aromatic amines (AAs), are a growing concern due to their similar chemical structures to carcinogens such as aniline and 2,6-dimethylaniline (Gan et al, 2004; Skipper et al, 2006) Exposure to these compounds can be ubiquitous because these AAs are widely used in work places as well as general environments as dyes, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, agricultural pesticides, antioxidants in polymers, and motor fuels (Kutting et al, 2009; Skipper, Kim, Sun, Wogan, & Tannenbaum, 2010; Angerer, Ewers, & Wilhelm 2007; Scherer, 2005). Unlike aniline and 4-aminobiphenyl, the environmental sources of personal air exposure to these compounds are still unknown and very little is understood about the airborne concentrations that potentially put an individual at risk for bladder cancer, because of lack of robust methods for quantifying AAs in air
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
