浓度加和模型在化学混合物毒性评估中的应用

doi:10.6023/A13040355

化学学报 ›› 2013, Vol. 71 ›› Issue (10): 1335-1340.DOI: 10.6023/A13040355 上一篇下一篇

研究展望

浓度加和模型在化学混合物毒性评估中的应用

刘树深, 刘玲, 陈浮

同济大学环境科学与工程学院长江水环境教育部重点实验室上海 200092

投稿日期:2013-04-01 发布日期:2013-06-13
通讯作者: 刘树深,E-mail:ssliuhl@263.net E-mail:ssliuhl@263.net
基金资助:
项目受国家自然科学基金(Nos. 21177097, 20977065)和高等学校博士学科点专项科研基金(No. 20120072110052)资助.

Application of the Concentration Addition Model in the Assessment of Chemical Mixture Toxicity

Liu Shushen, Liu Ling, Chen Fu

Key Laboratory of Yangtze River Water Environment, Ministry of Education, College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092

Received:2013-04-01 Published:2013-06-13
Supported by:
Project supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 21177097, 20977065) and Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education (Nos. 20120072110052).

文章分享

摘要/Abstract

化学污染物总是以混合物形式存在于实际环境体系中. 化学混合物的毒性评估与预测是环境化学领域当前的研究热点与难题. 要评估与预测一个化学混合物的毒性效应, 首先要证明其是否具有加和性. 目前有3个加和参考模型即浓度加和模型(CA)、独立作用模型(IA)与效应相加模型(ES)用于化学混合物毒性的加和性检验. 如果混合物效应明显偏离加和参考模型预测效应, 则认为该混合物产生毒性相互作用, 即协同或拮抗. 选择不同的加和参考模型可能得出不同的相互作用结论. ES模型最早广泛应用, 但不能解释由同一化合物构成的所谓虚拟组合现象, 应用已开始受到限制. IA模型被认为适用于具有相异作用模式的化学物构成的混合物, 而CA模型适用于相似作用模式化学物构成的混合物并能合理解释ES模型不能解释的虚拟组合现象, 常常认为是化学混合物毒性预测的标准模型. 然而, 由于CA模型目前没有坚实的理论支持, 也不能直接联系混合物毒性作用机理, 同时在浓度-效应曲线的部分区域存在不能预测的所谓“预测盲区”, 因此, CA模型也只是一个工作模型, 需谨慎使用.

关键词: 化学混合物, 虚拟组合, 效应相加, 效应加和, 预测盲区

Various chemical pollutants are always existing as mixtures in real environment. Currently, the assessment and prediction of chemical mixture toxicity is the hotspots and difficulties in environmental chemistry. To accurately assess and predict the toxicity of a chemical mixture, it is necessary to validate whether the toxicities of various components in the mixture is additive or not. Three common additive reference models, the effect summation (ES), concentration addition (CA), and independent action (IA), are available to determine the toxicity interaction. Synergism or antagonism between the components in a mixture can be identified if the observed toxicity of the mixture deviates from the prediction in terms of ES, CA, or IA. The resulting interaction type (synergism or antagonism) may be inconsistent according to those reference models applied. Although the ES model is the earliest application model proposed to assess and predict mixture toxicity, its application in environmental chemistry was affected due to its limit in the interpretation of the so-called sham combination constructed by the same compound. The IA model is suitable to model the toxicities of mixtures consisting of the components showing dissimilar modes of actions. The CA can predict the toxicities of the mixtures consisting of the chemicals with similar modes of actions and can rationally interpret the sham combination which is impossible to be depicted by the ES model. The CA is therefore often considered as a standard additive model for the toxicity prediction of a chemical mixture. However, the CA is only a pragmatic model because it has no solid theory basis and no direct connection with the mechanism of action resulting in toxicity. Furthermore, there are so-called predictive blind zones in some concentration intervals on the concentration-response curve where the toxicities of mixtures cannot be predicted by the CA. So, it is necessary to carefully use the CA model.

Key words: chemical mixture, sham combination, effect summation, response addition, predictive blind zone

引用此文

刘树深, 刘玲, 陈浮. 浓度加和模型在化学混合物毒性评估中的应用[J]. 化学学报, 2013, 71(10): 1335-1340.

Liu Shushen, Liu Ling, Chen Fu. Application of the Concentration Addition Model in the Assessment of Chemical Mixture Toxicity[J]. Acta Chimica Sinica, 2013, 71(10): 1335-1340.

导出引用 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

分享此文

参考文献

[1] Backhaus, T.; Faust, M. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46(5), 2564.

[2] Vacchi, F. I.; Albuquerque, A. F.; Vendemiatti, J. A.; Morales, D. A.; Ormond, A. B.; Freeman, H. S.; Zocolo, G. J.; Zanoni, M. V. B.; Umbuzeiro, G. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 442, 302.

[3] Spurgeon, D. J.; Jones, O. A. H.; Dorne, J. L. C. M.; Svendsen, C.; Swain, S.; Sturzenbaum, S. R. Sci. Total Environ. 2010, 408(18), 3725.

[4] Dominguez-Cortinas, G.; Diaz-Barriga, F.; Isabel Martinez-Salinas, R.; Cossío, P.; Nelinho Pérez-Maldonado, I. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2013, 20(1), 351.

[5] Berenbaum, M. J. Theor. Boil. 1985, 114, 413.

[6] Cedergreen, N.; Christensen, A. M.; Kamper, A.; Kudsk, P.; Mathiassen, S. K.; Streibig, J. C.; Sorensen, H. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2008, 27(7), 1621.

[7] Martin, H. L.; Svendsen, C.; Lister, L. J.; Gomez-Eyles, J. L.; Spurgeon, D. J. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2009, 28(1), 97.

[8] Silva, E.; Rajapakse, N.; Scholze, M.; Backhaus, T.; Ermler, S.; Kortenkamp, A. Toxicol. Sci. 2011, 122(2), 383.

[9] Porsbring, T.; Backhaus, T.; Johansson, P.; Kuylenstierna, M.; Blanck, H. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2010, 29(12), 2806.

[10] Bosgra, S.; van Eijkeren, J. C. H.; Slob, W. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2009, 39(5), 418.

[11] Fischer, B. D. CNS Neurol. Disord.-Drug Targets 2011, 10(5), 529.

[12] Abendroth, J. A.; Blankenship, E. E.; Martin, A. R.; Roeth, F. W. Weed Technol. 2011, 25(3), 436.

[13] Backhaus, T.; Arrhenius, A.; Blanck, H. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004, 38(23), 6363.

[14] Backhaus, T.; Faust, M.; Scholze, M.; Gramatica, P.; Vighi, M.; Grimme, L. H. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2004, 23(2), 258.

[15] Liu, S. S.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, Y. H.; Qin, L. T. Acta Chim. Sinica 2012, 70, 1511. (刘树深, 张瑾, 张亚辉, 覃礼堂, 化学学报, 2012, 70, 1511.)

[16] Liu, S. S.; Song, X. Q.; Liu, H. L.; Zhang, Y. H.; Zhang, J. Chemosphere 2009, 75, 381.

[17] Wang, L. J.; Liu, S. S.; Yuan, J.; Liu, H. L. Chemosphere 2011, 84, 1440.

[18] Rylee, P. D.; Stahlhut, R. W.; Ponzi, D.; vom Saal, F. S.; Taylor, J. A. Reprod. Toxicol. 2012, 34(4), 614.

[19] Andrade, A. J. M.; Grande, S. W.; Talsness, C. E.; Gericke, C.; Grote, K.; Golombiewski, A.; Sterner-Kock, A.; Chahoud, I. Toxicology 2006, 227(3), 185.

[20] Zhu, X. W.; Liu, S. S.; Qin, L. T.; Chen, F.; Liu, H. L. Ecotox. Environ. Safety 2013, 89, 130.

[21] Conolly, R. B.; Lutz, W. K. Toxicol. Sci. 2004, 77, 151.

[22] Jenkins, S.; Wang, J.; Eltoum, I.; Desmond, R.; Lamartiniere, C. A. Environ. Health. Perspect 2011, 119, 1604.

[23] Vandenberg, L. N.; Colborn, T.; Hayes, T. B.; Heindel, J. J.; Jacobs, D. R., Jr.; Lee, D. H.; Shioda, T.; Soto, A. M.; vom Saal, F. S.; Welshons, W. V.; Zoeller, R. T.; Myers, J. P. Endocr. Rev. 2012, 33, 378.

[24] Silva, E.; Rajapakse, N.; Kortenkamp, A. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002, 36(8), 1751.

[25] Faust, M.; Altenburger, R.; Backhaus, T.; Blanck, H.; Boedeker, W.; Gramatica, P.; Hamer, V.; Scholze, M.; Vighi, M.; Grimme, L. H. Aquat. Toxicol. 2001, 56(1), 13.

[26] Ge, H. L.; Liu, S. S.; Zhu, X. W.; Liu, H. L.; Wang, L. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 1623.

[27] Loewe, S. Arzneimittelforschung 1953, 3, 285.

[28] Berenbaum, M. C. Adv. Cancer Res. 1981, 35, 269.

[29] Tallarida, R. J. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Therap. 2006, 319(1), 1.

[30] Rodea-Palomares, I.; Petre, A. L.; Boltes, K.; Leganes, F.; Perdigon-Melon, J. A.; Rosal, R.; Fernandez-Pinas, F. Water Res. 2010, 44(2), 427.

[31] Sorensen, H.; Cedergreen, N.; Skovgaard, I. M.; Streibig, J. C. Environ. Ecol. Stat. 2007, 14(4), 383.

[32] Zhu, X. W.; Liu, S. S.; Ge, H. L.; Liu, Y. China Environ. Sci. 2009, 29(2), 113. (朱祥伟, 刘树深, 葛会林, 刘堰, 中国环境科学, 2009, 29(2), 113.)

[33] Baldwin, W. S.; Roling, J. A. Toxicol. Sci. 2009, 107(1), 93.

[34] Cedergreen, N.; Christensen, A. M.; Kamper, A.; Kudsk, P.; Mathiassen, S. K.; Streibig, J. C.; Sorensen, H. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2008, 27(7), 1621.

[35] Wang, Z.; Chen, J. W.; Huang, L. P.; Wang, Y.; Cai, X. Y.; Qiao, X. L.; Dong, Y. Y. Chemosphere 2009, 74(5), 735.

[36] Ermler, A. J.; Spurgeon, D. J.; Svendsen, C.; Griffin, J. L.; Swain, S. C.; Sturzenbaum, S. R.; Jones, O. A. H. Ecotoxicology 2012, 21(5), 1436.

[37] Christen, V.; Crettaz, P.; Oberli-Schraemmli, A.; Fent, K. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2012, 259(2), 169.

[38] Ermler, S.; Scholze, M.; Kortenkamp, A. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2011, 257(2), 189.

[39] Zhang, J.; Liu, S. S.; Zhang, J.; Qin, L. T.; Deng, H. P. J. Hazard. Mater. 2012, 239～240, 102.

[40] Backhaus, T.; Scholze, M.; Grimme, L. H. Aquat. Toxicol. 2000, 49(1～2), 49.

[41] Altenburger, R.; Backhaus, T.; Boedeker, W.; Faust, M.; Scholze, M.; Grimme, L. H. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2000, 19(9), 2341.

[42] Backhaus, T.; Altenburger, R.; Boedeker, W.; Faust, M.; Scholze, M.; Grimme, L. H. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2000, 19(9), 2348.

[43] Olmstead, A. W.; LeBlanc, G. A. Aquat. Toxicol. 2005, 75(3), 253.

[44] Mo, L. Y.; Liu, S. S.; Liu, H. L. China Environ. Sci. 2008, 28(4), 334. (莫凌云, 刘树深, 刘海玲, 中国环境科学, 2008, 28(4), 334.)

[45] Ge, H. L.; Liu, S. S.; Liu, F. Asian J. Ecotoxicol. 2006, 1(4), 295. (葛会林, 刘树深, 刘芳, 生态毒理学报, 2006, 1(4), 295.)

[46] Payne, J.; Rajapakse, N.; Wilkins, M.; Kortenkamp, A. Environ. Health Perspect. 2000, 108(10), 983.

[47] Song, X. Q.; Liu, S. S.; Liu, H. L.; Ge, H. L. Asian J. Ecotoxicol. 2008, 3(3), 237. (宋晓青, 刘树深, 刘海玲, 葛会林, 生态毒理学报, 2008, 3(3), 237.)

[48] Villa, S.; Migliorati, S.; Monti, G. S.; Vighi, M. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Safety 2012, 86, 93.

[49] Barata, C.; Fernandez-San Juan, M.; Feo, M. L.; Eljarrrat, E.; Soares, A. M. V. M.; Barcelo, D.; Baird, D. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46(17), 9663.

[50] Neuwoehner, J.; Fenner, K.; Escher, B. I. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43(17), 6830.

[51] Altenburger, R.; Nendza, M.; Schuurmann, G. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2003, 22(8), 1900.

浓度加和模型在化学混合物毒性评估中的应用

Application of the Concentration Addition Model in the Assessment of Chemical Mixture Toxicity

PDF

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用此文

分享此文

参考文献

相关文章 2

编辑推荐

相关统计

本文评价

[1]	王猛超, 刘树深, 陈浮. 拓展浓度加和模型预测三种三嗪类除草剂混合物的时间依赖毒性[J]. 化学学报, 2014, 72(1): 56-60.
[2]	刘树深, 张瑾, 张亚辉, 覃礼堂. APTox: 化学混合物毒性评估与预测[J]. 化学学报, 2012, 70(14): 1511-1517.