Land Use Regression Models for Ultrafine Particles in Six European Areas

Long-term ultrafine particle (UFP) exposure estimates at a fine spatial scale are needed for epidemiological studies. Land use regression (LUR) models were developed and evaluated for six European areas based on repeated 30 min monitoring following standardized protocols. In each area; Basel (Switzerland), Heraklion (Greece), Amsterdam, Maastricht, and Utrecht ("The Netherlands"), Norwich (United Kingdom), Sabadell (Spain), and Turin (Italy), 160-240 sites were monitored to develop LUR models by supervised stepwise selection of GIS predictors. For each area and all areas combined, 10 models were developed in stratified random selections of 90% of sites. UFP prediction robustness was evaluated with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) at 31-50 external sites per area. Models from Basel and The Netherlands were validated against repeated 24 h outdoor measurements. Structure and model R2 of local models were similar within, but varied between areas (e.g., 38-43% Turin; 25-31% Sabadell). Robustness of predictions within areas was high (ICC 0.73-0.98). External validation R2 was 53% in Basel and 50% in The Netherlands. Combined area models were robust (ICC 0.93-1.00) and explained UFP variation almost equally well as local models. In conclusion, robust UFP LUR models could be developed on short-term monitoring, explaining around 50% of spatial variance in longer-term measurements

Pesticides in doormat and floor dust from homes close to treated fields: Spatio-temporal variance and determinants of occurrence and concentrations

Indoor dust has been postulated as an important matrix for residential pesticide exposure. However, there is a lack of information on presence, concentrations and determinants of multiple pesticides in dust in residential homes close to treated fields. Our objective was to characterize the spatial and temporal variance of pesticides in house dust, study the use of doormats and floors as proxies for pesticides in indoor dust and identify determinants of occurrence and concentrations. Homes within 250 m from selected bulb fields were invited to participate. Homes within 20 km from these fields but not having agricultural fields within 500 m were selected as controls. House dust was vacuumed in all homes from floors (VFD) and from newly placed clean doormats (DDM). Sampling was done during two periods, when pesticides are used and not-used. For determination of 46 prioritized pesticides, a multi-residue extraction method was used. Most statistical analyses are focused on the 12 and 14 pesticides that were detected in >40% of DDM and VFD samples, respectively. Mixed models were used to evaluate relationships between possible determinants and pesticides occurrence and concentrations in DDM and VFD. 17 pesticides were detected in more than 50% of the homes in both matrixes. Concentrations differed by about a factor five between use and non-use periods among homes within 250 m of fields and between these homes and controls. For 7 pesticides there was a moderate to strong correlation (Spearman rho 0.30-0.75) between concentrations in DDM and VFD. Distance to agricultural fields and air concentrations were among the most relevant predictors for occurrence and levels of a given pesticide in DDM. Concentrations in dust are overall higher during application periods and closer to fields (<250 m) than further away. The omnipresence of pesticides in dust lead to residents being exposed all year round

Pesticides in doormat and floor dust from homes close to treated fields: Spatio-temporal variance and determinants of occurrence and concentrations

Indoor dust has been postulated as an important matrix for residential pesticide exposure. However, there is a lack of information on presence, concentrations and determinants of multiple pesticides in dust in residential homes close to treated fields. Our objective was to characterize the spatial and temporal variance of pesticides in house dust, study the use of doormats and floors as proxies for pesticides in indoor dust and identify determinants of occurrence and concentrations. Homes within 250 m from selected bulb fields were invited to participate. Homes within 20 km from these fields but not having agricultural fields within 500 m were selected as controls. House dust was vacuumed in all homes from floors (VFD) and from newly placed clean doormats (DDM). Sampling was done during two periods, when pesticides are used and not-used. For determination of 46 prioritized pesticides, a multi-residue extraction method was used. Most statistical analyses are focused on the 12 and 14 pesticides that were detected in >40% of DDM and VFD samples, respectively. Mixed models were used to evaluate relationships between possible determinants and pesticides occurrence and concentrations in DDM and VFD. 17 pesticides were detected in more than 50% of the homes in both matrixes. Concentrations differed by about a factor five between use and non-use periods among homes within 250 m of fields and between these homes and controls. For 7 pesticides there was a moderate to strong correlation (Spearman rho 0.30-0.75) between concentrations in DDM and VFD. Distance to agricultural fields and air concentrations were among the most relevant predictors for occurrence and levels of a given pesticide in DDM. Concentrations in dust are overall higher during application periods and closer to fields (<250 m) than further away. The omnipresence of pesticides in dust lead to residents being exposed all year round

Pesticides in doormat and floor dust from homes close to treated fields : Spatio-temporal variance and determinants of occurrence and concentrations

Indoor dust has been postulated as an important matrix for residential pesticide exposure. However, there is a lack of information on presence, concentrations and determinants of multiple pesticides in dust in residential homes close to treated fields. Our objective was to characterize the spatial and temporal variance of pesticides in house dust, study the use of doormats and floors as proxies for pesticides in indoor dust and identify determinants of occurrence and concentrations. Homes within 250 m from selected bulb fields were invited to participate. Homes within 20 km from these fields but not having agricultural fields within 500 m were selected as controls. House dust was vacuumed in all homes from floors (VFD) and from newly placed clean doormats (DDM). Sampling was done during two periods, when pesticides are used and not-used. For determination of 46 prioritized pesticides, a multi-residue extraction method was used. Most statistical analyses are focused on the 12 and 14 pesticides that were detected in >40% of DDM and VFD samples, respectively. Mixed models were used to evaluate relationships between possible determinants and pesticides occurrence and concentrations in DDM and VFD. 17 pesticides were detected in more than 50% of the homes in both matrixes. Concentrations differed by about a factor five between use and non-use periods among homes within 250 m of fields and between these homes and controls. For 7 pesticides there was a moderate to strong correlation (Spearman rho 0.30–0.75) between concentrations in DDM and VFD. Distance to agricultural fields and air concentrations were among the most relevant predictors for occurrence and levels of a given pesticide in DDM. Concentrations in dust are overall higher during application periods and closer to fields (<250 m) than further away. The omnipresence of pesticides in dust lead to residents being exposed all year round

Pesticides in doormat and floor dust from homes close to treated fields: Spatio-temporal variance and determinants of occurrence and concentrations

Indoor dust has been postulated as an important matrix for residential pesticide exposure. However, there is a lack of information on presence, concentrations and determinants of multiple pesticides in dust in residential homes close to treated fields. Our objective was to characterize the spatial and temporal variance of pesticides in house dust, study the use of doormats and floors as proxies for pesticides in indoor dust and identify determinants of occurrence and concentrations. Homes within 250 m from selected bulb fields were invited to participate. Homes within 20 km from these fields but not having agricultural fields within 500 m were selected as controls. House dust was vacuumed in all homes from floors (VFD) and from newly placed clean doormats (DDM). Sampling was done during two periods, when pesticides are used and not-used. For determination of 46 prioritized pesticides, a multi-residue extraction method was used. Most statistical analyses are focused on the 12 and 14 pesticides that were detected in >40% of DDM and VFD samples, respectively. Mixed models were used to evaluate relationships between possible determinants and pesticides occurrence and concentrations in DDM and VFD. 17 pesticides were detected in more than 50% of the homes in both matrixes. Concentrations differed by about a factor five between use and non-use periods among homes within 250 m of fields and between these homes and controls. For 7 pesticides there was a moderate to strong correlation (Spearman rho 0.30-0.75) between concentrations in DDM and VFD. Distance to agricultural fields and air concentrations were among the most relevant predictors for occurrence and levels of a given pesticide in DDM. Concentrations in dust are overall higher during application periods and closer to fields (<250 m) than further away. The omnipresence of pesticides in dust lead to residents being exposed all year round

OBOMod - Integrated modelling framework for residents' exposure to pesticides

BACKGROUND: Pesticides can be transported from the site of application to homes via different routes and lead to exposure of residents, raising concerns regarding health effects. We built a deterministic model framework (OBOmod) to assess exposure of residents living near fields where pesticides are applied. METHODS: OBOmod connects five independent models operating on an hourly timescale and high spatial resolution (meters). Models include descriptions of spray drift, volatilization, atmospheric transport and dispersion, exchange between outdoor and indoor air and exchange between indoor air and dust. Fourteen bulb field applications under different weather conditions and comprising 12 pesticides were simulated. Each simulation included the first seven days after the application. The concentrations computed with OBOmod were compared with those measured in outdoor and indoor air and the amounts measured in indoor dust samples. RESULTS: Model evaluation indicated suitability of the developed framework to estimate outdoor and indoor air concentrations. For most pesticides, model accuracy was good. The framework explained about 30% to 95% of the temporal and spatial variability of air concentrations. For 20% of the simulations, the framework explained more than 35% of spatial variability of concentrations in dust. In general, OBOmod estimates remained within one order of magnitude from measured levels. Calculations showed that in addition to spray drift during application, volatilization from the field after spraying and pesticides in house dust are important routes for residents' exposure to pesticides. CONCLUSIONS: Our framework covers many processes needed to calculate exposure of residents to pesticides. The evaluation phase shows that, with the exception of the dust model, the framework can be used in support of health and epidemiological studies, and can serve as a tool to support development of regulations and policy making regarding pesticide use

OBOMod - Integrated modelling framework for residents' exposure to pesticides

BACKGROUND: Pesticides can be transported from the site of application to homes via different routes and lead to exposure of residents, raising concerns regarding health effects. We built a deterministic model framework (OBOmod) to assess exposure of residents living near fields where pesticides are applied. METHODS: OBOmod connects five independent models operating on an hourly timescale and high spatial resolution (meters). Models include descriptions of spray drift, volatilization, atmospheric transport and dispersion, exchange between outdoor and indoor air and exchange between indoor air and dust. Fourteen bulb field applications under different weather conditions and comprising 12 pesticides were simulated. Each simulation included the first seven days after the application. The concentrations computed with OBOmod were compared with those measured in outdoor and indoor air and the amounts measured in indoor dust samples. RESULTS: Model evaluation indicated suitability of the developed framework to estimate outdoor and indoor air concentrations. For most pesticides, model accuracy was good. The framework explained about 30% to 95% of the temporal and spatial variability of air concentrations. For 20% of the simulations, the framework explained more than 35% of spatial variability of concentrations in dust. In general, OBOmod estimates remained within one order of magnitude from measured levels. Calculations showed that in addition to spray drift during application, volatilization from the field after spraying and pesticides in house dust are important routes for residents' exposure to pesticides. CONCLUSIONS: Our framework covers many processes needed to calculate exposure of residents to pesticides. The evaluation phase shows that, with the exception of the dust model, the framework can be used in support of health and epidemiological studies, and can serve as a tool to support development of regulations and policy making regarding pesticide use

Land Use Regression Models for Ultrafine Particles in Six European Areas

Long-term ultrafine particle (UFP) exposure estimates at a fine spatial scale are needed for epidemiological studies. Land use regression (LUR) models were developed and evaluated for six European areas based on repeated 30 min monitoring following standardized protocols. In each area; Basel (Switzerland), Heraklion (Greece), Amsterdam, Maastricht, and Utrecht ("The Netherlands"), Norwich (United Kingdom), Sabadell (Spain), and Turin (Italy), 160-240 sites were monitored to develop LUR models by supervised stepwise selection of GIS predictors. For each area and all areas combined, 10 models were developed in stratified random selections of 90% of sites. UFP prediction robustness was evaluated with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) at 31-50 external sites per area. Models from Basel and The Netherlands were validated against repeated 24 h outdoor measurements. Structure and model R2 of local models were similar within, but varied between areas (e.g., 38-43% Turin; 25-31% Sabadell). Robustness of predictions within areas was high (ICC 0.73-0.98). External validation R2 was 53% in Basel and 50% in The Netherlands. Combined area models were robust (ICC 0.93-1.00) and explained UFP variation almost equally well as local models. In conclusion, robust UFP LUR models could be developed on short-term monitoring, explaining around 50% of spatial variance in longer-term measurements