You are here:
MODELED ESTIMATES OF CHLORPYRIFOS EXPOSURE AND DOSE FOR THE MINNESOTA AND ARIZONA NHEXAS POPULATIONS
Buck, R. J., A H. Ozkaynak, J. Xue, V Zartarian, AND K Hammerstrom. MODELED ESTIMATES OF CHLORPYRIFOS EXPOSURE AND DOSE FOR THE MINNESOTA AND ARIZONA NHEXAS POPULATIONS. JOURNAL OF EXPOSURE ANALYSIS AND ENVIRONMENTAL EPIDEMIOLOGY 11(3):253-268, (2001).
The primary objective of this research is to produce a documented version of the aggregate SHEDS-Pesticides model for conducting reliable probabilistic population assessments of human exposure and dose to environmental pollutants. SHEDS is being developed to help answer the following questions:
(1) What is the population distribution of exposure for a given cohort for existing scenarios or for proposed exposure reduction scenarios?
(2) What is the intensity, duration, frequency, and timing of exposures from different routes?
(3) What are the most critical media, routes, pathways, and factors contributing to exposures?
(4) What is the uncertainty associated with predictions of exposure for a population?
(5) How do modeled estimates compare to real-world data?
(6) What additional human exposure measurements are needed to reduce uncertainty in population estimates?
This paper presents a probabilistic, multimedia, multipathway exposure model and assessment for chlorpyrifos developed as part of the National Human Exposure Assessment Survey (NHEXAS). The model was constructed using available information prior to completion of the NHEXAS study. It simulates the distribution of daily aggregate and pathway-specific chlorpyrifos absorbed dose in the general population of the State of Arizona (AZ) and in children aged 3 to 12 years residing in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota (MSP). Pathways included were inhalation of indoor and outdoor air, dietary ingestion, non-dietary ingestion of dust and soil, and dermal contact with dust and soil. Probability distributions for model input parameters were derived from the available literature, and input values were chosen to represent chlorpyrifos concentrations and demographics in AZ and MSP to the extent possible. When the NHEXAS AZ and MSP data become available, they can be compared to the distributions derived in this and other prototype modeling assessments to test the adequacy of this pre-NHEXAS model assessment.
Although pathway-specific absorbed dose estimates differed between AZ and MSP due to differences in model inputs between simulated adults and children, the aggregate model results and general findings for simulated AZ and MSP populations were similar. The major route of chlorpyrifos intake was food ingestion, followed by indoor air inhalation. Two-stage Monte Carlo simulation was used to derive estimates of both inter-individual variability and uncertainty in the estimated distributions. The variability in the model results reflects the difference in activity patterns, exposure factors, and concentrations contacted by individuals during their daily activities. Based on the coefficient of variation, indoor air inhalation and dust ingestion were most variable relative to the mean, primarily because of variability in concentrations due to use or no-use of pesticides. Uncertainty analyses indicated a factor of 10-30 for uncertainty of model predictions of 10th, 50th, and 90th percentiles. The greatest source of uncertainty in the model stems from the definition of no household pesticide use as no use in the past year. Because chlorpyrifos persists in the residential environment for longer than a year, the modeled estimates are likely to be low. More information on pesticide usage and environmental concentrations measured at different post-application times is needed to refine and evaluate this and other pesticide exposure models.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development funded and collaborated in the research described here under NHEXAS Cooperative Agreement Number CR822038-1 to Harvard University. It has been subjected to Agency review and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use.