|
|
University of Colorado
Relative Bioavailability Leaching
Procedure: RBALP
Standard Operating Procedure
1.0 Purpose
An increasingly important property of contaminated media found at environmental sites
is the bioavailabilty of individual contaminants. Bioavailability is the fraction of a
contaminant that is absorbed by an organism via a specific exposure route. Many animal
studies have been conducted to experimentally determine oral bioavailability of individual
metals, particularly lead and arsenic. During the period 1989-97, a juvenile swine model
developed by USEPA Region VIII was used to measure the relative bioavailability of lead
and arsenic in approximately 20 substrates (Weis and LaVelle 1991; Weis et al. 1994). The
bioavailability determined was relative (RBA) to that of a soluble salt (i.e. lead acetate
trihydrate or sodium arsenate). The tested media had a wide range of mineralogy, and
produced a range of lead and arsenic RBA values. In addition to the swine studies, other
animal models (e.g. rats and monkeys) have been used for measuring the RBA of lead and
arsenic from soils. However, to-date the swine model is still considered the most
appropriate for measuring child exposure.
Several researchers have developed in vitro tests to measure the fraction of a
chemical solubilized from a soil sample under simulated gastrointestinal conditions. The in
vitro tests consist of an aqueous fluid, into which the contaminant is introduced.
The solution than solubilizes the media under simulated gastric conditions. Once this
procedure is complete, the solution is analyzed for lead and/or arsenic. The mass of the
lead and/or arsenic found in the filtered extract is compared to the mass introduced into
the test. The fraction liberated into the aqueous phase is defined as the bioaccessable
fraction of lead or arsenic in that media (IVBA). To date, for lead-bearing materials
tested in the USEPA swine studies, this in vitro assay has correlated well (R2
= 0.83, p= .0001) with relative bioavailability. Arsenic has yet to be fully validated but
shows a promising correlation with in vivo results.
|
|
|
It has been postulated that a simplified in vitro method could be used to
estimate bioavailability of lead and arsenic. The method described in this SOP represents
a simplified in vitro method, which has been formally validated by USEPA (2004)
for lead.
2.0 Scope
This procedure has been validated based on contaminated media from animal studies, to
determine the correlation between in vitro and in vivo (IVIVC). Only
samples from which mineralogy has been fully characterized by EMPA techniques and for
which bioavailability results from acceptable animal models are available have been used
for this study. A total of 19 substrates have been tested in validating the relative
bioavailability leaching procedure (RBALP) for lead.
3.0 Relevant Literature
Background on the development of in vitro test systems for estimating lead and
arsenic bioaccessability can be found in; Ruby et al. (1993, 1996); Medlin (1972); Medlin
and Drexler, 1997; Drexler, 1998; and Drexler and Brattin, 2007.
Background information for the USEPA swine studies may be found in (Weis and LaVelle,
1991; Weis et al. 1994; and Casteel et al., 1997) and in the USEPA Region VIII Center in
Denver, Colorado.
4.0 Sample Preparation
All media are prepared for the in vitro assay by first drying (<40 °C) all
samples and then sieving to < 250 µm. The <250 µm size fraction was used because
this is the particle size is representative of that which adheres to childrens
hands. Samples were thoroughly mixed prior to use to ensure homogenization. Samples are
archived after the study completion and retained for further analysis for a period of six
months unless otherwise requested. Prior to obtaining a subsample for testing in this
procedure, each sample must be homogenized in its sample container by end-over-end mixing.
5.0 Apparatus and Materials
5.1 Equipment
The main piece of equipment required for this procedure is the extraction device
illustrated in Figure 1. The device can be purchased from the Department of Geological
Sciences, University of Colorado. For further information contact Dr. John W. Drexler, at
(303) 492-5251 or drexlerj@colorado.edu. The device holds ten 125 ml, wide-mouth
high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bottles. These are rotated within a Plexiglas tank by a
TCLP extractor motor with a modified flywheel. The water bath must be filled such that the
extraction bottles remained immersed. Temperature in the water bath is maintained at 37
+/- 2 °C using an immersion circulatory heater (Fisher Scientific Model 730).
The 125-ml HDPE bottles must have an airtight screw-cap seal (Fisher Scientific
#02-893-5C), and care must be taken to ensure that the bottles do not leak during the
extraction procedure.
5.2 Standards and Reagents
The leaching procedure for this method uses an aqueous extraction fluid at a pH value
of 1.5. The pH 1.5 fluid is prepared as follows:
Prepare 2 L of aqueous extraction fluid using ASTM Type II deionized (DI) water. The
buffer is made up in the following manner. To 1.9 L of DI water, add 60.06 g glycine (free
base, reagent grade), and bring the solution volume to 2 L (0.4M glycine). Place the
mixture in the water bath at 37 °C until the extraction fluid reaches 37 °C. Standardize
the pH meter ( one should use both a 2.0 and a 4.0 pH buffer for standardization) using
temperature compensation at 37 °C or buffers maintained at 37 °C in the water bath. Add
trace metal grade, concentrated hydrochloric acid (12.1N) until the solution pH reaches a
value of 1.50 +/_ 0.05 (approximately 60 mL).
All reagents must be free of lead and arsenic, and the final fluid must be tested to
confirm that lead and arsenic concentrations are less than one-fourth the project required
detection limits (PRDLs) of 10 and 20 µg/L, respectively (e.g., less than 2 µg/L lead
and 5µg/L arsenic in the final fluid.
Cleanliness of all materials used to prepare and/or store the extraction fluid and buffer
is essential. All glassware and equipment used to prepare standards and reagents must be
properly cleaned, acid washed, and finally, triple-rinsed with deionized water prior to
use.
6.0 Leaching Procedure
Add 1.00 +/- 0.5 g of test substrate (<250 µm) to the bottle, ensuring that static
electricity does not cause soil particles to adhere to the lip or outside threads of the
bottle. If necessary, use an anti-static brush to eliminate static electricity prior to
adding the media. Record the mass of substrate. When ready to begin the test-- measure 100
+/- 0.5 mL of the extraction fluid, using a graduated cylinder or auto pipette and
transfer to the 125 mL wide-mouth HPDE bottles. Hand-tighten each bottle top and
shake/invert to ensure that no leakage occurs, and that no media is caked on the bottom of
the bottle.
Place the bottle into the modified TCLP extractor, making sure each bottle is secure and
the lid(s) are tightly fastened. Fill the extractor with 125 mL bottles containing test
materials or QA samples.
The temperature of the water bath must be 37 +/- 2 °C.
Turn on the extractor and rotate end-over-end at 30 +/- 2 rpm for 1 hour. Record the start
time of rotation.
When extraction (rotation) is complete, immediately stop the extractor rotation and remove
the bottles. Wipe them dry and place upright on the bench top.
Draw extract directly from the reaction vessel into a disposable 20 cc syringe with a
Luer-Lok attachment. Attach a 0.45 µm cellulose acetate disk filter (25 mm diameter) to
the syringe, and filter the extract into a clean 15 mL polypropylene centrifuge tube
(labeled with sample ID) or other appropriate sample vial for analysis.
Record the time that the extract is filtered (i.e. extraction is stopped). If the total
time elapsed is greater than 1 hour 30 minutes, the test must be repeated.
Measure the pH of the remaining fluid in the extraction bottle. If the fluid pH is not
within +/_ 0.5 pH units of the starting pH, the test must be discarded and the sample
reanalyzed as follows:
If the pH has changed more than 0.5 units, the test will be re-run in an identical
fashion. If the second test also results in a decrease in pH of greater than 0.5 s.u. this
will be recorded, and the extract filtered for analysis. If the pH has increased by 0.5
s.u. or more, the test must be repeated, but the extractor must be stopped at specific
intervals and the pH manually adjusted down to pH of 1.5 with drop-wise addition of HCl
(adjustments at 5, 10, 15, and 30 minutes into the extraction, and upon final removal from
the water bath { 60 min}). Samples with rising pH values might better be run following the
method of Medlin, 1997.
Store filtered samples in a refrigerator at 4 °C until they are analyzed. Analysis for
lead and arsenic concentrations must occur within 1 week of extraction for each sample.
Extracts are to be analyzed for lead and arsenic, as specified in EPA methods 6010B, 6020,
or 7061A.
6.1 Quality Control/Quality Assurance
Quality Assurance for the extraction procedure will consist of the following quality
control samples.
Bottle Blank-extraction fluid only run through the complete procedure at a frequency of 1
in 20 samples.
Blank Spike- extraction fluid will be spiked at concentrations of 2.5 mg/L lead and
arsenic and run through the complete procedure at a frequency of 1 in 10 samples.
Matrix Spike-a subsample of each material used will be spiked at concentrations of 2.5
mg/L lead and arsenic and run through the extraction procedure (frequency of 1 in 10
samples).
Duplicate sample-duplicate sample extractions to be performed on 1 in 10 samples.
National Institute of Standards and Testing (NIST) Standard Reference Material (SRM) 2710
or 2711 will be used as a control soil. The SRM will be analyzed at a frequency of 1 in 20
samples.
Control limits for lead are listed below.
|
Analysis Frequency |
Control Limits |
| Bottle blank |
5% - 1:20 |
< 25 µ g/L lead |
| Blank spike * |
5% - 1:20 |
85-115% recovery |
| Matrix spike * |
10% - 1:10 |
75-125% recovery |
| Duplicate sample |
10% - 1:10 |
+/- 20% RPD** |
| Control soil *** |
5% - 1:20 |
+/- 10% RPD |
| * |
Spikes contained 2.5 mg/L lead and arsenic. |
| ** |
RPD= relative percent difference. |
| *** |
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Standard Reference Material
(SRM) 2710 or 2711. |
7.0 Chain-of-Custody Procedures
All media once received by the Laboratory must be maintained under standard
chain-of-custody.
8.0 Data Handling and Verification
All sample weights, fluid concentrations, and calculations must be recorded on data
sheets. Finally all key data will be entered into the attached EXCEL spreadsheet for final
delivery and calculation of IVBA.
9.0 References
Casteel, S.W., R.P. Cowart, C.P. Weis, G.M. Henningsen, E.Hoffman and J.W. Drexler,
1997. Bioavailability of lead in soil from the Smuggler Mountain site of Aspen Colorado.
Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 36: 177-187.
Drexler, J.W., 1998. An in vitro method that works! A simple, rapid and accurate
method for determination of lead bioavailability. EPA Workshop, Durham, NC.
Drexler, J.W., and Brattin, W., 2007. An In Vitro Procedure for Estimation of
Lead Relative Bioavailability: With Validation. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment.
13(2), pp. 383-401.
Medlin, E., and Drexler, J.W., 1995. Development of an in vitro technique for the
determination of bioavalability from metal-bearing solids., International Conference on
the Biogeochemistry of Trace Elements, Paris, France.
Medlin, E.A., 1997, An In Vitro method for estimating the relative
bioavailability of lead in humans. Masters thesis. Department of Geological Sciences,
University of Colorado, Boulder.
Ruby, M.W., A. Davis, T.E. Link, R. Schoof, R.L. Chaney, G.B. Freeman, and P. Bergstrom.
1993. Development of an in vitro screening test to evaluate the in vivo
bioaccessability of ingested mine-waste lead. Environ. Sci. Technol. 27(13): 2870-2877.
Ruby, M.W., A. Davis, R. Schoof, S. Eberle. And C.M. Sellstone. 1996 Estimation of lead
and arsenic bioavailbilty using a physiologically based extraction test. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 30(2): 422-430.
USEPA, 2004. Estimation of relative Bioavailability of lead in Soil and Soil-Like
Materials Using In Vivo and In Vitro Methods. OSWER-9285.7-77, June
2004, Washington, DC.
Weis, C.P., and J.M. LaVelle. 1991. Characteristics to consider when choosing an animal
model for the study of lead bioavailability. In: Proceedings of the International
Symposium on the Bioavailability and Dietary Uptake of Lead. Sci. Technol. Let. 3:113-119.
Weis, C.P., R.H., Poppenga, B.J. Thacker, and G.M. Henningsen, 1994. Design of
parmacokinetic and bioavailability studies of lead in an immature swine model. In: Lead in
paint, soil, and dust: health risks, exposure studies, control measures, measurement
methods, and quality assurance, ASTM STP 1226, M.E. Beard and S.A. Iske (Eds.). American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 19103-1187.
© Copyright 2003 LEGS
Site Created by Ben Drexler |