Integrating bioaccessibility into health risk assessment for optimized cadmium remediation in rice
Le résumé fourni par la source
Heavy metal contamination, particularly cadmium (Cd) pollution in rice, has become a critical environmental and food safety challenge in China. This study innovatively integrates intestinal-phase bioaccessibility into the health risk assessment framework. Compared to traditional methods based solely on total Cd concentrations, this indicator more accurately reflects the actual absorption efficiency of Cd in the human body. Our results demonstrated significant variation in the efficacy of individual remediation methods in reducing both Cd accumulation in rice grains and gastrointestinal bioaccessibility. Specifically, bioaccessibility in the gastric and intestinal phases averaged 49 % (range 20–74 %) and 26 % (range 14–48 %), respectively, exhibiting a non-linear correlation with Cd concentrations in rice. By incorporating intestinal-phase Cd bioaccessibility into health risk assessments, we identified an optimal remediation approach comprising low Cd-accumulating rice cultivars, soil amendments, foliar fertilizers, and post-grouting flooding treatments. This integrated strategy significantly reduced Cd concentrations in rice, thereby effectively mitigating human health risks, with an overall risk reduction of 76 %. This framework enhances the targeted efficiency of heavy metal remediation and avoids over-remediation in traditional risk assessments. It provides a scientifically sound and economically viable solution for sustainable farmland management.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Integrating bioaccessibility into health risk assessment for optimized cadmium remediation in rice
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2025
- Éditeur
- Elsevier BV
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.