A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Cytotoxic and genotoxic potential of drinking water: a comparison between two different concentration methods. | LitMetric

Cytotoxic and genotoxic potential of drinking water: a comparison between two different concentration methods.

Water Res

Dipartimento di Genetica, Biologia dei Microrganismi, Antropologia, Evoluzione, Università di Parma, Via Usberti, Parma, Italy.

Published: April 2008

The level of exposure to hazardous compounds through drinking water is low but it is maintained throughout life, therefore representing a risk factor for human health. The use of techniques averaging the consumer's exposure over time could be more useful than relying on intermittent grab samples that may misrepresent average tap water concentrations due to short-term temporal variability. In this study, we compared the induction of in vitro cytotoxic and genotoxic effects (DNA damage by the comet assay) in relation to different sampling methods, i.e. exposure over time (semipermeable membrane devices, SPMDs, exposed for 30 days) or intermittent grab samples (5 weekly water sampling, C18 concentration). Waters with different chemical characteristics were sampled to test the sensitivity of the two methods. We did not found any positive correlation between the biological findings and water chemical parameters. SPMD extracts induced a significantly greater DNA damage than C18. The different behaviour was specially found for the water samples with a low level of organic compounds and when C18 extracts were highly cytotoxic. Our findings suggest that SPMD could be of a great interest in assessing genotoxic contaminants in both raw and drinking water, with great suitability for continuous monitoring. Furthermore, the results of this study have confirmed the great importance of the biological assays in evaluating the effects of a complex mixture such as water in addition to the conventional chemical examination of water quality.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2007.12.005DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

drinking water
12
water
9
cytotoxic genotoxic
8
exposure time
8
intermittent grab
8
grab samples
8
dna damage
8
genotoxic potential
4
potential drinking
4
water comparison
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!