Anggi Anggraini (1804111464) Review Jurnal
Anggi Anggraini (1804111464) Review Jurnal
Resiko Kesehatan untuk Asupan Manusia dari Ikan Budidaya: Biokumulasi dan
Kontaminasi Arsenic
Latar Belakang
Sebagai unsur toksik dan karsinogenik, arsenik menimbulkan masalah kesehatan
manusia yang signifikan. Studi epidemiologis telah menunjukkan efek karsinogenik
arsenik pada manusia memiliki resiko kanker yang lebih tinggi untuk kulit dan organ
lainnya termasuk paru-paru, kandung kemih, ginjal dan hati, bahkan beresiko kematian
yang telah dilaporkan. Di Taiwan, arsenik telah di dokumentasikan sebagai salah satu
faktor resiko untuk penyakit kaki hitam (BFD) dan dianggap karena mengonsumsi air
tanah.
Selain itu, air tanah di daerah tersebut digunakan untuk kolam ikan komersial skala
besar. Konsumsi ikan yang terkontaminasi arsenik dapat menyebabkan efek kesehatan
yang merugikan. Hewan budidaya yang terkontaminasi arsenik seperti, ikan tilapia dan
udang.
Tujuan
Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk metilapiai kanker dan resiko non-kanker
dari mengonsumsi ikan tilapia dan udang yang terkontaminasi arsenik di Taiwan serta
untuk mengukur biokumulasi arsenik dalam berbagai bagian ikan dengan distribusi
spesies arsenik organik dan anorganik.
Metode
Penelitian ini untuk menghitung kandungan arsenik total yang dianalisis
menggunakan Millenium Ex Callibur Flourecence Atomic Analyzer. Sedangkan untuk
kalkulasi menggunakan BAF dan data di sajikan menggunakan SPSS Statistical software
version 13.0 (SPSS Inc.).
Hasil
Tingkat Arsenik dalam ikan, air tambak, dan sedimen
Hasil penelitian menyatakan bahwa rata-rata total arsenik dalam air tambak lebih
tinggi di Budai, diikuti oleh Beimen dan Yichu yang menunjukkan tidak banyak variasi
diantara kolam. Total Kandungan arsenik dari 0,79-1,12 mg g-1 diamati pada sedimen
kolam. Temuan ini mengungkapkan bahwa arsenik dalam air tambak dan sedimen adalah
media paparan penting untuk biokumulasi seperti pada ikan. Arsenik tidak terdeteksi
dalam bahan pakan yang digunakan untuk memberi makan ikan.
Biokumulasi Arsenik dalam ikan
Perkiraan BAF untuk arsenik anorganik (dengan asumsi total arsenik sebagai
arsenik anorganik di ari tambak) ditemukan pada kisaran 1,33-2,82. Biokumulasi total
arsenik pada ikan sangat tinggi berkolerasi dengan kadar arsenik total air tambak. Oleh
karena itu, ikan dapat digunakan sebagai indikator untuk pencemaran air permukaan oleh
konsentrasi arsenik yang tinggi. Kandungan arsenik dianalisis dalam tiga bagian utama
yang dapat dikonsumsi tubuh yaitu kepala, jaringan dan tulang. Dalam penelitian bahwa
tingkat arsenik dalam jaringan secara signifikan lebih rendah. Kadar arsenik pada otot
ikan lebih tinggi dibandingkan bagin lainnya.
Potensi resiko kesehatan manusia
Nilai CR dan HQ menunjukkan bahwa konsumsi nila terkontaminasi arsenik air
tanah meningkatkan kanker dan non-kanker resiko bagi orang yang mengkonsumsi ikan
ini. Populasi Taiwan yang terpapar arsenik menunjukkan peningkatan kanker organ
internat yang fatal serta peningkatan pada kanker kulit.
Kesimpulan
Ikan budidaya dari kolam budidaya air tanah di Taiwan merupakan resiko kesehatan
potensial bagi manusia sebagai paparan arsenik. Sampel air dari semua kolam budidaya
memiliki konsentrasi arsenik lebih besar dari 10 g L-1, yang mana batas air minum aman
yang diamanatkan USEPA. Penduduk yang terkena arsenik setelah mengonsumsi ikan
nila terkontaminasi arsenik, mengakibatkan resiko karsinogenik dan non karsinogenik.
Kelebihan
Kelebihan dari jurnal ini adalah pemaparan penelitian yang mudah dipahami. Selain
itu, penelitian tersebut menjelaskan dampak dan solusi dari pencemaran arsenik sehingga
membuat terkontaminasinya ikan budidaya.
Kekurangan
Kekurangan dari jurnal ini adalah kurangnya penjelasan tentang dampak dari
mengonsumsi ikan yang terkontaminasi arsenik dari segi non karsinogenik.
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233294670
Health risks for human intake of aquacultural fish: Arsenic bioaccumulation and
contamination
CITATIONS READS
75 1,146
7 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Targeting As-safe aquifers in regions with high arsenic groundwater and its worldwide implications View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Jyoti Prakash Maity on 02 June 2014.
To cite this article: Sandeep Kar, Jyoti Prakash Maity, Jiin-Shuh Jean, Chia-Chuan Liu, Chen-Wuing Liu, Jochen Bundschuh &
Hsueh-Yu Lu (2011): Health risks for human intake of aquacultural fish: Arsenic bioaccumulation and contamination, Journal
of Environmental Science and Health, Part A, 46:11, 1266-1273
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should
be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims,
proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A (2011) 46, 1266–1273
Copyright C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
5
KTH-International Groundwater Arsenic Research Group, Department of Land and Water Resources Engineering,
Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden
Aquacultural tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus L.) and shrimp (Penaeus monodon L.) from groundwater-cultured ponds in south-
western Taiwan were analyzed to estimate arsenic (As) bioaccumulation and the potential health risk to human intake. Most of
aquacultural ponds exhibited higher arsenic than maximum allowed concentrations (50 µg L−1) in pond water of Taiwan. Arsenic
levels in tilapia in Budai, Yichu and Beimen were 0.92 ± 0.52 µg g−1, 0.93 ± 0.19 µg g−1 and 0.76 ± 0.03 µg g−1, respectively and in
shrimp was 0.36 ± 0.01 µg g−1 in Beimen. Total arsenic in tilapia is highly correlated (R2 = 0.80) with total arsenic concentration
of pond water. Total arsenic in fish showed high correlation with that in bone (R2 = 0.98), head (R2 = 0.97) and tissue (R2 = 0.96).
Organic arsenic species (DMA) was found higher relative to inorganic species of As(III) and As(V). The average percent contribution
of inorganic arsenic to total arsenic in fish samples was 12.5% and ranged between 11.7 to 14.2%. Bioaccumulation factors (BAFs)
for total arsenic in fish ranged from 10.3 to 22.1, whereas BAF for inorganic arsenic ranged from 1.33 to 2.82. The mean human
health cancer risk associated with the ingestion of inorganic arsenic in the fish was estimated at 2.36 × 10−4 ± 0.99 × 10−4, which is
over 200 times greater than a de Minimus cancer risk of 1 × 10−6. The mean human health hazard quotient associated with ingesting
inorganic arsenic in the fish was 1.22 ± 0.52, indicating that expected human exposure exceeds the reference dose for non-cancer
health effects by 22%. These results suggest that the inhabitants in this region are being subjected to moderately elevated arsenic
exposure through the consumption of tilapia and shrimp raised in aquaculture ponds.
Keywords: Groundwater arsenic, tilapia, shrimp, bioaccumulation, health risk.
ter for aquaculture that may cause an accumulation of Millipore acetate cellulose membrane (0.45 µm pore size)
arsenic in fish.[12–13,15–16] Arsenic-contaminated fish con- filtering apparatus. Extracted sample was kept in a refrig-
sumption could result in arsenic exposure to humans and erator at 4◦ C prior to total final arsenic quantification.
lead to adverse health effects.[17] Ling et al. have esti-
mated the risk of the intake of aquacultural milkfish from
Analytical
the ponds that use arsenic-contaminated groundwater.[13]
However, there is limited research on the cancer risk and Total arsenic content was analyzed using the Millenium Ex-
non-cancer health risk associated with consuming arsenic- callibur Fluorecence Atomic Analyzer (PS Analytical Ltd,
contaminated tilapia and shrimp. Kent, UK). Analytical accuracy was checked with reference
In the present investigation, we assess the cancer and material with precision ensured through repeated measure-
non-cancer risk of consuming aquacultural tilapia and ments. For total arsenic, standard reference solution SRM
shrimp contaminated with arsenic in southwestern Taiwan. 3103a (NIST, USA) was used. The standard solutions for
Also, the study quantifies the bioaccumulation of arsenic arsenic speciation of arsenite [As(III)], arsenate [As(V)] and
within different parts of the fish along with the distribu- dimethyl arsenic (DMA) were prepared by dissolving in wa-
tion of organic and inorganic arsenic species. These results ter from the commercially available salts: arsenite (sodium
will be valuable to physiologically based pharmacokinetic arsenite), arsenate (sodium arsenate), DMA (dimethyl ar-
(PBPK) model in assessing various internal cancers caused senic acid sodium salt, trihydrate). Chemicals including
by ingestion of arsenic-affected tilapia. As(V) and As(III) and DMA salts were purchased from
Sigma Aldrich (USA). De-ionized water used for all so-
lutions was prepared with an Auto Pure WQ500 system
(Millipore, Bedford, MA).
Nitric acid (containing 67% HNO3 ) and hydrochloric
Materials and methods
acid (containing 36% HCl) used for wet-digestion were of
super special grade. All other chemicals were of analytical
Sample collection and preparation
grade. The detection limit of arsenic species was 1 µg L−1
We investigated several aquaculture ponds from three dif- for all three species and was 0.1 µg L−1 for total arsenic.
ferent areas including Budai (B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4 and B- The coefficient of variation (CV) was calculated to test the
5), Yichu (Y-6 and Y-7) and Beimen (Be-8 and Be-9) of reliability and was found <5% in all the replicates. Quality
Southwest Taiwan (Fig. 1a). Tilapia (Oreochromis mossam- assurance was confirmed with standard reference material
bicus L.) and shrimp (Penaeus monodon L.) samples were (DORM-2, dogfish tissues) with same digestion method
collected along with pond water from selected cultivation and analytical procedure. Recovery rates ranged from 97%
ponds where arsenic-contaminated groundwater has been to 102% (Certified mean value: 18.0 ± 1.1 µg g−1; Measured
used. The fish samples (kept frozen during transportation) mean value: 17.6 ± 0.68 µg g−1 to 18.3 ± 0.82 µg g−1).
were washed thoroughly with tap water to remove soil and For speciation of arsenic (As(III), As(V) and DMA),
other particles and finally washed with de-ionized water a coupled high performance liquid chromatography –
with continuous shaking. The samples were then stored at hydride generation – atomic fluorescence spectrometry
−20◦ C until further analysis. Length and weight of each (HPLC-HG-AFS) system was used with a PSA analyzer
fish were recorded before dissection. Part of the fish tissues (Kent, UK). A P.S. Analytical model Excalibur atomic flu-
were minced and blended to get a homogenous sample and orescence spectrometer (AFS) equipped with an As hollow
prepared for analysis of arsenic speciation. Fish bone and cathode lamp (current intensities primary = 27.5; boost
head also separated for digestion to estimate total arsenic. = 35.0) and a Perma pure drying membrane for drying
1268 Kar et al.
Downloaded by [National Cheng Kung University] at 23:32 31 August 2011
Fig. 1. (a) Map showing locations of sampling sites in the southwestern part of Taiwan. (b) Schematic diagram of investigation process
to assess potential risk (CR: Cancer Risk; HQ: Hazard Quotient).
the generated hydride were utilized. Speciation of arsenic stand overnight for the separation of chloroform and wa-
was measured at 193.7 nm wavelength. Data acquisition ter/methanol layers. The water/methanol layer was evapo-
was performed with computer software (SISC). Peak sig- rated to dryness and dissolved in 5 mL of de-ionized water.
nals were recorded using a computer linked to PSA that is After filtering the filtrate was made up to 10 mL with de-
capable of both peak height and peak area measurement. ionized water and used as a water-soluble arsenic fraction.
The peak height signals were measured and the concentra-
tions of arsenic of the samples were measured against the
standard curve. Calculation of bioaccumulation factor (BAF)
Separation of the species was performed using the GBC The bioaccumulation factor (BAF), relating the concentra-
LC 1120 HPLC system which includes an autosampler, tion of arsenic in water to its level in fish[12], was used to
column oven and mobile phase degasser in addition to the estimate the propensity of arsenic accumulation in tilapia
chromatography pump. A 200 µL aliquot of the sample so- and shrimp: BAF = Cf /Cw , where Cf (µg g−1) is the arsenic
lution was injected into the LC system (Injector: Rheodyne level in fish and Cw (µg L−1) is the arsenic concentration in
7725i, USA), equipped with a Hamilton PRP X100 anionic water.
column. Phosphate buffer solution at pH 6.0 was pumped
at 1 mL min−1. The eluent from the chromatographic col-
umn reached the hydride generation system, where HCl Estimation of potential health risks
(2 mol L−1 at 8 mL min−1) and 1.5% (m/v) NaBH4 in
The human health risk associated with the ingestion of
0.4% NaOH at 3 mL min−1 were introduced. The elute
inorganic arsenic in aquacultural tilapia and shrimp was
reached the gas-liquid separator and was then transferred
estimated following U.S. EPA guidelines.[19–20] A schematic
to an Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometer (AFS) detector
diagram has been shown to understand the accumulation
with the help of argon flow of 300 mL min−1 through an
process which raises the potential risk (Fig. 1b). Cancer
air-based Perma pure drying membrane (air flow: 2.5 L
risk (CR) and hazard quotients (HQ) were used to indicate
min−1).
the magnitude of carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic hu-
man health risks, respectively. The method to estimate CR
and HQ is provided in the USEPA Guidance for Assessing
Extraction of arsenic for speciation Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish Advisories,
Each sample was extracted by using mortar and pestle. A Volume 2, Risk Assessment and Fish Consumption Lim-
3 g-portion of the sample was extracted with 30 mL of its, Third edition.[19–20] The equations for estimating CR
chloroform and methanol (2:1). Because the use of only and HQ are shown as follows:
organic solvents is suggested to be insufficient to extract
CR = Cb × IRF × 10−3 × CPSo × EFr × ED tot
water-soluble arsenic compounds, especially inorganic ar-
/ (BWa × ATc) and
senicals, the residue was further extracted with 30 mL of
de-ionized water.[18] Both chloroform-methanol and water HQ = Cb × IRF × 10−3 × EFr × EDtot
extracts were combined, shaken vigorously and allowed to / (RfD × BWa × ATn)
Health risks for human intake of As-contaminated fish 1269
where CR is the calculated cancer risk; Cb is the inorganic in feedstuffs used to feed the fish at a detection limit of 0.1
arsenic level in fish (mg kg−1); IRF is the fish ingestion rate µg L−1. Earlier studies of Huang et al. also supported this
(g d−1); CPSo is the oral carcinogenic potency slope (kg d finding of arsenic contamination in farmed fish and pond
mg−1); EFr is the exposure frequency (350 d yr−1); EDtot water from the arsenic-contaminated region.[14]
is the total exposure duration (30 yr); BWa is the body
weight of an adult (70 kg); ATc is the averaging time for
carcinogens (25,550 d); HQ is the hazard quotient; RfD is Bioaccumulation of arsenic in fish
the reference dose (mg kg−1d−1); and ATn is the averaging The bioaccumulation of arsenic in freshwater-cultured fish
time for non-carcinogens (EDtot × 365 d yr−1). The calcu- (tilapia and shrimp) was measured to assess the risks to
lated cancer risk and hazard quotient were compared to a human health (see section Potential health risk). Table 1
de Minimus lifetime cancer risk of 1 × 10−6 and a target represents the bioaccumulation factor (BAF) of total ar-
hazard quotient of 1.0, respectively. Values of CPSo and senic in tilapia from pond water. BAF for total arsenic was
RfD for arsenic (1.5 kg−1 d mg−1 and 3 × 10−4 mg kg−1 found in the range from 10.3 to 22 in tilapia from the Budai
d−1, respectively) were taken from USEPA’s Integrated Risk aquacultural pond, whereas 15.1 to18.4 and 12.5 to 15.7 in
Information System (IRIS) database (www.epa.gov/IRIS). Yichu and Beimen, respectively. Estimated BAF for inor-
Downloaded by [National Cheng Kung University] at 23:32 31 August 2011
We evaluated potential human health risks on the basis of ganic arsenic (assuming total arsenic as inorganic arsenic
inorganic arsenic in fish since the CPSo and RfD for arsenic in pond water) was found in the range of 1.33 to 2.82.
apply to inorganic arsenic, not total arsenic. The bioaccumulation of total arsenic in fish is highly
correlated with total arsenic level of pond water (n = 10;
Statistical analysis R2 = 0.80; p < 0.05) (Fig. 2a). This relationship was found
to be in good agreement with Lin.[21] Therefore fish can
Data were presented as minimum-maximum values and be used as a bioassay indicator for surface water pollution
mean ± standard deviation (SD), correlation statistics, level by high concentrations of arsenic. Arsenic contents were
of significance were analyzed using the SPSS statistical soft- also analyzed in three major consumable parts of fish
ware version 13.0 (SPSS Inc.). A p-value less than 0.05 was body, namely the head, tissue and bone. Fish tissue was
considered to indicate statistical significance. Linear regres- characterized by a higher content of arsenic than fish bone
sion was used to find correlation between the arsenic level and head (Table 2).
in pond water and that in the fish body. The mean arsenic levels in fish tissue were found in the
range from 0.43 ± 0.01 to 1.91 ± 0.05 µg g−1. The mean
Results and discussion arsenic contents in fish bone and head were found in the
range from 0.33 ± 0.01 to 1.42 ± 0.04 µg g−1 and 0.21 ±
Arsenic levels in fish, pond water and sediment 0.01 to 1.31 ± 0.04 µg g−1, respectively. Arsenic content
in total fish is highly correlated with the arsenic content of
The study investigated the relationship between As levels in bone (n = 10; R2 = 0.98) compared to head (n = 10; R2 =
aquaculture pond water, sediment and cultured fish. Mean 0.97) and tissue (n = 10; R2 = 0.96) of tilapia (Fig. 2b). The
concentrations of total arsenic in the aquacultural pond variation of arsenic concentrations in different parts of the
water (n = 10) in Budai were found in the range from 29.5 tilapia body was shown in Figure 2c. Table 3 indicates that
± 1.10 to 75.7 ± 1.90 µg L−1 in contrast to 52.3 ± 1.60 to
58.6 ± 1.70 µg L−1 and 64.6 ± 1.80 to 71.3 ± 1.90 µg L−1
for Yichu (n = 10) and Beimen (n = 10), respectively (per- Table 1. Bioaccumulation Factor (BAF) of total arsenic in tilapia
missible limit 50 µg L−1 for aquacultural water in Taiwan) (Units of BAF in L g−1).
(Table 1). Average total arsenic in pond water was higher Total arsenic content (n = 10)
in Budai, followed by Beimen and Yichu, indicating not
much variation among the ponds. Total arsenic contents Sampling Tilapia Pond water BAF =
of 0.79–1.12 mg g−1 were observed in pond sediments (not pond (µg g−1) (Cf ) (Cw )(µg L−1) Cf /Cw
shown in table). B-1 0.70 ± 0.04 56.9 ± 1.6 12.3
These findings reveal that As in pond water and sediment B-2 1.34 ± 0.09 68.3 ± 1.8 19.6
are important exposure media for the bioaccumulation of B-3 1.58 ± 0.09 75.7 ± 1.9 20.9
As in fish. The mean length of sampled tilapia (n = 10) was B-4 0.33 ± 0.02 32.2 ± 1.2 10.3
16.6 ± 2.14 cm, and the mean weight was 204 ± 25.5 g (fresh B-5 0.65 ± 0.02 29.5 ± 1.1 22
weight). The arsenic contents in tilapia in Budai were found Y-6 0.79 ± 0.04 52.3 ± 1.6 15.1
to be at an alarming level (n = 10) in the range from 0.33 to Y-7 1.07 ± 0.08 58.6 ± 1.7 18.3
1.58 µg g−1 (mean 0.92 ± 0.52 µg g−1), whereas 0.79 to 1.7 Be-8 0.78 ± 0.04 71.3 ± 1.9 10.9
µg g−1 (mean 0.93 ± 0.19 µg g−1) and 0.73 to 0.78 µg g−1 Be-9 0.73 ± 0.02 64.6 ± 1.8 11.3
(mean 0.76 ± 0.03 µg g−1) were the concentration ranges in ∗
BAF = Bioaccumulation Factor; Cf = Concentration in fish; Cw =
Yichu and Beimen, respectively. Arsenic was not detected Concentration in water.
1270 Kar et al.
Downloaded by [National Cheng Kung University] at 23:32 31 August 2011
Fig. 2. (a) Relation between total arsenic levels in fish and pond water samples in Budai, Yichu and Beimen in Taiwan. (b) Relation
between total arsenic levels in head, tissue and bone of aquacultural tilapia fish. (c) Box and Whisker plot representing the variation
of total arsenic levels in head, tissue and bone of tilapia.
large tilapia fish contains more total arsenic than smaller our results with these published data. Arsenic in different
ones. fish tissues were analyzed by Shah et al.[22] and showed
Arsenic content in different parts of the fish body has significant higher level in fish muscle (2.12–15.2 µg g−1)
been studied by various researchers and we can compare compared to gills (1.01–10.4 µg g−1), mouth pieces
(1.01–18.6 µg g−1), intestine (1.01–11.2 µg g−1), and liver
(3.51–10.9 µg g−1). Jankong et al. reported that the As level
Table 2. Total arsenic content in head, muscle and bone of tilapia in contaminated areas of Thailand as high as 0.05–0.81 µg
cultured using contaminated groundwater (n = 10).
Arsenic in tilapia (µg g−1) Table 3. Total arsenic content in different parts of large and small
tilapia and shrimp cultured using contaminated groundwater (n
Sampling pond Head Muscle Bone
= 10).
B-1 0.54 ± 0.02 0.92 ± 0.03 0.65 ± 0.02
Arsenic in different parts of fish (µg g−1)
B-2 1.13 ± 0.03 1.72 ± 0.05 1.21 ± 0.04
B-3 1.31 ± 0.04 1.91 ± 0.05 1.42 ± 0.04 Fish Head Tissue Bone
B-4 0.21 ± 0.01 0.43 ± 0.01 0.33 ± 0.01
B-5 0.48 ± 0.01 0.78 ± 0.02 0.69 ± 0.02 Tilapia(large): Body 0.63 ± 0.01 1.03 ± 0.01 0.76 ± 0.01
Y-6 0.59 ± 0.02 1.12 ± 0.03 0.66 ± 0.02 weight > 200 g
Y-7 0.81 ± 0.02 1.31 ± 0.04 1.05 ± 0.03 Tilapia (small): Body — 0.58 ± 0.01 —
Be-8 0.69 ± 0.02 0.84 ± 0.02 0.72 ± 0.02 weight < 100 g
Be-9 0.57 ± 0.02 0.93 ± 0.03 0.68 ± 0.02 Shrimp — 0.36 ± 0.01 —
Health risks for human intake of As-contaminated fish 1271
g−1 in edible fish muscle.[23] In comparison to our results, compounds being more toxic than their organic counter-
it was observed that the arsenic level in fish tissues were parts[5,28].
significantly lower in contaminated areas of Taiwan. An
arsenic level in fish muscle was higher than other parts
like bone and head, which is in agreement with Chan and Potential human health risk
Huff.[24] The accumulation and distribution of As in the Our data show that tilapia and shrimp bioaccumulate ar-
fish body are probably controlled by methylation capacity senic while being cultured in ponds in southwestern Taiwan.
(which likely changes with exposure), period of metabolism Local inhabitants are known to consume these species and
and As-excretion.[22] hence are exposed to arsenic through ingestion. This expo-
sure, in turn, represents a health risk to these inhabitants
based upon the toxicity of arsenic. A conceptual diagram
Arsenic species in fish shows the mechanism of arsenic contamination and accu-
mulation in aquacultural fish and the associated risk to
Table 4 shows concentrations of the three major arsenic people who then consume the fish (Fig. 3). Cancer risk and
species in tilapia tissue, As(III), As(V), and DMA. Results
Downloaded by [National Cheng Kung University] at 23:32 31 August 2011
pounds. In Environmental Health Criteria Series, No. 224: Arsenic Jalbani, N.; Baig, J.A.; Kandhro, A. Accumulation of arsenic in
and arsenic compounds, WHO, Geneva, 2001; 521. different fresh water fish species – potential contribution to high
[10] Mandal, B.K.; Suzuki, K.T. Arsenic round the world: A review. arsenic intakes. Food Chem. 2009, 112, 520–524.
Talanta 2002, 58, 201–235. [23] Jankong, P.; Chalhoub, C.; Kienzl, N.B.; Goessler, W.; Francescon,
[11] Lee, J.J.; Jang, C.S.; Wang, S.W.; Liu, C.W. Evaluation of poten- K.A.; Visoottiviseth, P. Arsenic accumulation and speciation in
tial health risk of arsenic–affected groundwater using indicator freshwater fish living in arsenic-contaminated waters. Environ.
kriging and dose-response model. Sci. Tot. Environ. 2007, 384, Chem. 2007, 4, 11–17.
151–162. [24] Chan, P.C.; Huff, J. Arsenic carcinogenesis in animals and in hu-
[12] Lin, M.C.; Cheng, H.H.; Lin, H.Y.; Chen, Y.C.; Chen, Y.P.; Liao, mans: mechanistic, experimental, and epidemiological evidence. J.
C.M.; Chang-Chien, G.P.; Dai, C.F.; Han, B.C.; Liu, C.W. Arsenic Environ. Sci. Health 1997, 15, 83–122.
accumulation and acute toxicity in milkfish (Chanos chanos) from [25] Lin, M.C.; Liao, C.M. Assessing the risks on human health as-
blackfoot disease area in Taiwan. Bull Environ. Contam. Toxicol. sociated with inorganic arsenic intake from groundwater-cultured
2004, 72, 248–254. milkfish in southwestern Taiwan. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2008, 46,
[13] Ling, M.P.; Liao, C.M.; Tsai, J.W.; Chen, B.C. A PBPK/PD 701–709.
modeling-based approach can assess arsenic bioaccumulation in [26] Liu, C.W.; Liang, C.P.; Lin, K.H.; Jang, C.S., Wang, S.W.; Huang,
farmed tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus) and human health risks. Y.K.; Hsueh, Y.M. Bioaccumulation of arsenic compounds in aqua-
Integr. Env. Assess. Manag. 2005, 1, 40–54. cultural clams (Meretrix lusoria) and assessment of potential car-
[14] Huang, Y.K.; Lin, K.H.; Chen, H.W.; Chang, C.C.; Liu, C.W.; Yang, cinogenic risks to human health by ingestion. Chemosphere 2007,
M.H.; Hsueh, Y.M. Arsenic species contents at aquaculture farm 69, 128–134.
and in farmed mouthbreeder (Oreochromis mossambicus) in black- [27] Maher, W.; Goesler, W.; Kirby, J.; Raber, G. Arsenic concentrations
foot disease hyperendemic areas. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2003, 41, and speciation in the tissues and blood of sea mullet (Mugil cephalus)
1491–1500. from Lake Maxquarie NSW, Australia. Marine Chem. 1999, 68,
[15] Liao, C.M.; Ling, M.P. Assessment of human health risks for 169–182.
arsenic bioaccumulation in tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus) [28] Phillips, D.J.H. Arsenic in aquatic organisms: A review, emphasizing
and large-scale mullet (Liza macrolepis) from blackfoot disease chemical speciation. Aquat. Toxicol. 1990, 16, 151–186.
area in Taiwan. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2003, 45, [29] Jang, C.S.; Liu, C.W.; Lin, K.H.; Huang, F.M.; Wang, S.W. Spatial
264–272. analysis of potential carcinogenic risks associated with ingesting
[16] Ling, M.P.; Liao, C.M. Risk characterization and exposure assess- arsenic in aquacultural tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus) in black-
ment in arseniasis-endemic areas of Taiwan. Environ. Int. 2007, 33, food disease hyperendemic areas. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40,
98–107. 1707–1713.