Mutagenicity of Water Samples from Five Cities in Korea.

Park, J.H.; Kang, Ki-Young; Lee, Y.S.

doi:10.1292/jvms.63.767

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, disinfection by-products (DBP) are often generated and some of these are known to have mutagenic and carcinogenic properties [105][106][107]. Some suggestions that DBP can be estrogenic have arisen also.…”

Section: Chlorinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment and Removal Strategies for Estrogens From Wastewater

Koh

Chiu

Boobis

et al. 2008

Environmental Technology

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural and synthetic steroidal estrogens (estrone, 17 -estradiol and 17 -ethinylestradiol) are endocrine disrupters, that are discharged consistently from the sewage treatment works into surface waters, thereby causing endocrine disrupting effects to aquatic organisms at trace concentrations (nanogram per litre). Several years of research have been focused on their fate, behaviour and removal in the environment but primarily in the sewage treatment works which acts as a sink for these compounds. This review attempts to summarize the factors involved in the removal of these chemicals from the sewage treatment works. Biological processes, and to a limited extent physio-chemical properties, play a vital role in the endocrinal deactivation of these compounds. The efficiency of these processes is highly dependent on operating parameters (such as sludge retention time, redox potential, etc) that govern the secondary treatment process of a functional sewage treatment works. Although advanced treatment technologies are available, cost and operational considerations do not make them a sustainable solution.

show abstract

Section: Chlorinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment and Removal Strategies for Estrogens From Wastewater

Koh

Chiu

Boobis

et al. 2008

Environmental Technology

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some others works [12,13] also demonstrated that the strain TA98 was more sensitive to detect the mutagenicity of water samples than the strain TA100 and the absence of S9 mix showed higher mutagenic activity of waters compared to the presence of S9 mix. In comparing with our previous work on Miyun reservoir, which is the main drinking water source in Beijing, Guanting reservoir showed much remarkable mutagenic effects.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Mutagenicity of Water and Sediment Extracts from the Yongdinghe Watershed

Rao

Wang

2003

Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Potential mutagenicities of water and sediment in Guanting Reservoir/Yongdinghe River Watershed in Beijing, China were assessed using the Ame's tests for the organic pollutants. For different sampling sites, the results were indicative for the existence of mutagens. Furthermore, by using different types of Ames tests, different types of mutagens in water and in sediment were elucidated. The results on Ames tests for water concentrates and sediment extracts could be obviously differentiated. Mutagens in water were mainly direct-acting mutagens whereas in sediment they were mainly pro-mutagens, which exhibit mutagenic effects only after metabolic activation. In general, among all the six sampling sites, site-1, site-2 and site-4 were potentially at mutagenic risk. In a trial to find the causes of mutagenicities in the sediment samples, chemical analysis was performed for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and organochlorinated pesticides. However, the available data were not sufficient to explain the mutagenicity in the sediment. Integration of the results of Ames test and chemical analysis on overlying water and sediment samples in Guanting Reservoir and Yongdinghe River indicated that this catchment was moderately contaminated by PCBs and organochlorinated pesticides thereby causing a significant mutaginicity in water and sediment. Special attention should be given to the water quality in site-1 and sediment quality in site-4.

show abstract

“…The samples did not show mutagenic risk with TA100, implies that frame-shift mutagens are responsible for this mutagenic risk [20]. For Fressi table water, only the finished product treated with Ozone and Ultraviolet rays showed mutagenic risk but other samples showed cytotoxicity [21]. From this study, the finished products had mutagenic potential with Kent table water showing the greatest mutagenic risk which might be from natural products in the raw water or from run-offs such as industrial/agricultural contamination of the source water and products arising from drinking water treatment and/or distribution [22 -24].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…From this study, the finished products had mutagenic potential with Kent table water showing the greatest mutagenic risk which might be from natural products in the raw water or from run-offs such as industrial/agricultural contamination of the source water and products arising from drinking water treatment and/or distribution [22 -24]. Disinfectants such as chlorine can introduce non-volatile mutagens in drinking water [21]. The mutagenic activity appears to originate primarily from the reactions of chlorine with the humic substances in water sources [24].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mutagenic Potentials of Potable Water From Ground Sources

Agwa¹,

Eze²,

Okpokwasili³

2017

TOBIOTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The presence of compounds with mutagenic activity in drinking water by means of short-term mutagenicity tests have been revealed in many studies. The influence of the different water treatment steps on the mutagenicity of some drinking water samples were evaluated using the Ames test.Method:Four different types of samples were collected from four water treatment factories within Port Harcourt metropolis: raw water from borehole (1), water after sand and granular activated carbon filtration (2), water after reverse osmosis (3), and water after Ozone and UV treatment (4). These samples were subjected to mutagenicity test using two mutant strains ofSalmonella typhimurium(TA 100 and TA 98) without S9 activation enzyme.Result:The mutagenic analysis results revealed that raw water samples from Kent and Rivoli table water products showed mutagenic potential with TA100 and TA 98, respectively. But Kent table water showed more mutagenic potential than Rivoli and Fressi table water samples. Fressi table water is predominantly cytotoxic with all the treatment processes except for UV treatment with TA 98 strain. The finished products (water after ozone and UV treatment) of Kent table water and Rivoli table water also showed mutagenic potentials higher than those treated with TA100 and TA98 without S9 mix, respectively. Only the samples treated with activated carbon showed highly reduced mutagenic potential.Conclusion:This study highlights the mutagenic effects of water treatment as another quality assessment option for assessing the portability of water samples. Water treatment with activated carbon can be reintroduced after disinfection with ozone/ultraviolet to eliminate possible mutagenic by-product in the finished product.

show abstract

Mutagenicity of Water Samples from Five Cities in Korea.

Cited by 11 publications

References 16 publications

Treatment and Removal Strategies for Estrogens From Wastewater

Treatment and Removal Strategies for Estrogens From Wastewater

Mutagenicity of Water and Sediment Extracts from the Yongdinghe Watershed

Mutagenic Potentials of Potable Water From Ground Sources

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About