Share this article on:

Update on Bioaccessibility Testing of Inorganic Elements: Comparison of Methods and Reproducibility

Reimer, K J

doi: 10.1097/01.ede.0000339603.77567.75
Abstracts: ISEE 20th Annual Conference, Pasadena, California, October 12–16, 2008: Symposium Abstracts

Royal Military College of Canada, Kingston, ON, Canada.

Abstracts published in Epidemiology have been reviewed by the organizations of Epidemiology. Affliate Societies at whose meetings the abstracts have been accepted for presentation. These abstracts have not undergone review by the Editorial Board of Epidemiology.


Back to Top | Article Outline


A strong need has been recognized in Canada for a review and comparison of soil bioaccessibility methods which have been developed independently over the years and are being used by Canadian laboratories for risk assessment purposes. A mostly Canadian research consortium (Bioaccessibility Research Canada–BARC), which also includes international participation, is conducting an initial round robin study that will compare soil bioaccessibility data using a commonly sourced material. The primary objective of this initiative is to advance the science of soil bioaccessibility in Canada and improve confidence in the use of bioaccessibility data for human health risk assessment.

Specifically, reproducibility within and between methods is being compared. Sixteen groups are involved: eight of them are university groups, four are government groups, and the remaining four are consulting/commercial laboratories. Five non-Canadian groups from the US, UK and Netherlands are participating. The round robin experiment encompasses 19 methods with some similarities between methods. Each laboratory conducted bioaccessibility testing on 5 replicates of NIST 2710, a standard reference soil that is contaminated with lead, arsenic and zinc, among other elements. Additionally, each lab conducted testing on 3 spiked blanks and 3 blanks. All extracts were analyzed at a commercial lab as well as at each participating lab. An update on the experiment, including measures of reproducibility between replicates within a lab, and between results from the commercial and participating labs, will be presented. Additionally, any similarities between methods and associated results will be addressed.

© 2008 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.