Public Health Risk of Arsenic Species in Chicken Tissues from Live

Subscriber access provided by UB + Fachbibliothek Chemie | (FU-Bibliothekssystem)

Article

Public Health Risk of Arsenic Species in Chicken Tissues from Live Poultry Markets of Guangdong Province, China Yuanan Hu, Wenfeng Zhang, Hefa Cheng, and Shu Tao Environ. Sci. Technol., Just Accepted Manuscript • Publication Date (Web): 21 Feb 2017 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on February 21, 2017

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

Environmental Science & Technology is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 32

Environmental Science & Technology

TOC Art TOC Art 84x47mm (300 x 300 DPI)

ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 2 of 32

1

Public Health Risk of Arsenic Species in Chicken Tissues

2

from Live Poultry Markets of Guangdong Province, China

3

Yuanan Hu1, Wenfeng Zhang2, Hefa Cheng3*, Shu Tao3

4 5 6

1 MOE Laboratory of Groundwater Circulation and Evolution

7

School of Water Resources and Environment

8

China University of Geosciences (Beijing)

9

Beijing 100083, China

10 11

2 State Key Laboratory of Organic Geochemistry

12

Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences

13

Guangzhou 510640, China

14 15

3 MOE Key Laboratory for Earth Surface Processes

16

College of Urban and Environmental Sciences

17

Peking University

18

Beijing 100871, China

19 20

Submitted to: Environmental Science & Technology

21 22

* Corresponding author phone: (+86) 10 6276 1070; fax: (+86) 10 6276 7921; e-mail:

23

[email protected] ACS Paragon Plus 1 Environment

Page 3 of 32

24


TOC Art

25

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

ACS Paragon Plus 2 Environment


44

Page 4 of 32

Abstract

45 46

Arsenic-based feed additives, such as roxarsone (ROX), are still legally and widely used in food

47

animal production in many countries.

This study was conducted to systematically characterize

48

the content and speciation of arsenic in chicken tissues from live poultry markets and in

49

commercial chicken feeds in Guangdong, a major poultry production and consumption province in

50

China, and to assess the corresponding public health risk.

51

commercial feeds could be modeled as a mixture of two log-normal distributions (geometric

52

means: 0.66 and 17.5 mg/kg), and inorganic arsenic occurred at high levels (0.19-9.7 mg/kg) in

53

those with ROX detected. In general, chicken livers had much higher contents of total arsenic

54

compared to the muscle tissues (breast and drumstick), and chicken muscle from the urban

55

markets contained arsenic at much higher levels than that from the rural markets.

56

incremental lifetime cancer risk (bladder and lung cancer) from dietary exposure to arsenic

57

contained in chicken meat products on local markets was above the serious or priority level (10-4)

58

for 70 and 30% of the adult populations in Guangzhou and Lianzhou, respectively.

59

findings indicate the significant need to phase out the use of arsenic-based feed additives in China.

The total arsenic contents in the

The

These

60 61

1. Introduction

62 63

Phenylarsenic compounds, including roxarsone (ROX) and p-arsanilic acid (p-ASA), had been

64

widely used as feed additives in poultry and swine production around the world over the past

65

several decades, primarily for the purposes of controlling coccidial parasites, promoting weight

66

gain, and enhancing meat pigmentation.1,2 Although ROX, which is used primarily in poultry

67

production, is of low toxicity, its routine use can lead to residues of more toxic inorganic arsenic

68

species in chicken tissues.3-9

Exposure to inorganic arsenic (i-As) can result in increased risk of ACS Paragon Plus 3 Environment

Page 5 of 32


69

bladder, lung, and skin cancer, as well as several non-cancer diseases, including cardiovascular

70

disease, diabetes, and cognitive deficits.10-13 With residues of arsenic compounds potentially

71

occurring at elevated levels in chicken tissues, health risk could arise from consumption of such

72

meat products.1,14,15

73

1999,16 while the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) phased out their use in 2013.17

74

Nonetheless, they are still widely used in many countries around the world, including Austrlia,

75

Brazil, China, and India.18-20

76

even after the recent ban in the U.S. due to the fast expansion of factory farming.21,22 For ROX,

77

an allowable dose limit of 50 mg/kg in chicken feed has been set in China,23 but little information

78

is available on its consumption in poultry production.

79

commercial chicken feeds on the markets in Guangdong province were supplemented with ROX,

80

with contents ranging from 0.7 to 17.7 mg/kg.22

The European Union banned the use of arsenic-based feed additives in

In particular, the use of ROX has shown a growing trend in China

A recent study found that 30% of

81 82

The residues and speciation of arsenic in animal meat products resulting from the use of

83

arsenic-based feed additives in swine and poultry farming have received little attention until

84

recently.6,24 A study by the U.S. FDA found that the use of ROX as a feed additive increased the

85

levels of various arsenic species, such as As(III), As(V), dimethylarsinic acid (DMA), and

86

monomethylarsonic acid (MMA), in the tissues of broilers.9 A market basket study conducted in

87

the U.S. before the use of ROX was banned showed that meat products of chickens raised in

88

conventional farms had much higher contents of i-As compared to those of antimicrobial-free

89

chickens raised in conventional farms and organic chickens.6

90

additional bladder and lung cancer cases per 100,000 people could result from lifetime

91

consumption of the conventional chicken meat products compared with consumption of organic

92

chickens in the U.S.6

93 ACS Paragon Plus 4 Environment

It was further estimated that 3.7


94

Page 6 of 32

There is a significant need to understand the health risk of arsenic residues in chicken tissues

95

associated with the use of arsenic-based feed additives in chicken production in China.

The

96

present study aimed to assess the public health risk of dietary exposure to the arsenic species

97

present in chicken tissues on live poultry markets in Guangdong province, which ranks among the

98

top in both chicken production and consumption per capita in China. The results show that the

99

chicken tissues on both urban and rural markets contained elevated levels of arsenic species, and

100

dietary intake of i-As from lifetime consumption of chicken meat products could pose significant

101

cancer risk to local populations.

102 103

2. Methods

104 105

2.1. Sample collection and analysis

106 107

A total of 354 samples of chicken tissues were randomly purchased from 9 live poultry markets

108

in Guangzhou and 5 live poultry markets in Lianzhou of Guangdong province (Supporting

109

Information or SI Figure 1), between January 2013 and October 2014 (see SI Table 1 for details).

110

All samples were collected fresh (within 1 h of slaughtering), and were taken to the laboratory (in

111

Guangzhou) or a -20 °C refrigerator (in Lianzhou) in coolers within 1 h. The samples from

112

Lianzhou were subsequently transported in frozen state to the laboratory in Guangzhou. Once

113

received in the laboratory, all samples (defreezed if necessary) were rinsed with distilled water,

114

and sliced into small pieces. They were powderized after being freeze-dried and then stored at

115

-20 °C prior to sample preparation and analysis (within 2 weeks).

116 117 118

Consumers in Guangdong prefer live poultry over frozen meat, and consider the former to be much healthier and fresher.

Multiple breeds of chickens were obtained by sampling each market ACS Paragon Plus 5 Environment

Page 7 of 32


119

at different times, covering those consumed by the local populations.

These samples were also

120

expected to be generally representative of the products sold on local food markets.

121

one of the most developed urban centers in China, while Lianzhou, which has a per capita gross

122

domestic product (GDP) only ~1/6 of that of Guangzhou (127,800 Yuan in 2014), is a relatively

123

under-developed area in Guangdong province.

124

Guangzhou were mostly supplied by factory farms, while those on the Lianzhou markets came

125

largely from family and small farms, according to the poultry vendors.

Guangzhou is

Chickens on the live poultry markets in

126 127

A total of 61 samples of commercial chicken feeds covering all major types and brands, which

128

were collected from retailer markets across Guangdong province in November 2011, were kindly

129

supplied by South China Agricultural University (see SI Table 2 for details).

130

large-scale poultry farms rely exclusively on commercial feeds in their production, while chickens

131

raised in backyard and small family farms are often fed with corn, bran, and kitchen leftover.

Mid- and

132 133

The total contents of arsenic in the feed and tissue samples were determined by inductively

134

coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) after microwave-assisted digestion, while the major

135

inorganic and organic arsenic species, including arsenobetaine (AsB), DMA, MMA, i-As, p-ASA,

136

and ROX, in selected tissue and feed samples were extracted using microwave-assisted extraction

137

(MAE), and then detected with high performance liquid chromatography hyphenated with ICP-MS

138

(HPLC-ICP-MS), using the method developed in our group.25 The method detection limits were

139

0.936 g/kg for AsB, 4.68 g/kg for i-As, 3.12 g/kg for DMA, 4.68 g/kg for MMA, 8.06 g/kg

140

for p-ASA, and 18.7 g/kg for ROX in chicken tissues (wet weight, as As), respectively.

141

of sample preparation, digestion and extraction methods, instrumental analysis, and quality

142

assurance and quality control procedures followed are summarized in the SI.


Details


Page 8 of 32

143 144

2.2. Data analysis

145 146

Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) test was utilized to identify whether the contents of

147

arsenic had statistically significant difference between various chicken tissues, and unpaired t-test

148

was applied to determine if the samples collected from Guangzhou and Lianzhou had significant

149

difference. Pearson’s correlation analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between the

150

total arsenic contents in different tissues of the same chickens and the association among the

151

various arsenic species in chicken livers.

152 153

Due to lack of predictive models for the risk of cancer and non-cancer diseases in Chinese

154

population, we applied the methods developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

155

(USEPA) to assess the corresponding health risk of arsenic exposure associated with chicken

156

consumption.

157

The lifetime average daily dose (LADD) of i-As was estimated as: 𝐿𝐴𝐷𝐷 =

𝐶𝑖𝐴𝑠 ×𝐼𝑅

(1)

𝐵𝑊

158

where CiAs is the content of i-As in chicken tissue (mg/kg, wet weight), IR is the lifetime per capita

159

daily intake rate of chicken tissue (wet weight), and BW is the average body weight. The IR for

160

populations of Guangzhou and Lianzhou were estimated from the provincial average consumption

161

rate of rural residents, and the expenditures on poultry purchases of urban households in

162

Guangdong, respectively (SI Table 3).

163

ingestion was calculated as:

164

The incremental lifetime cancer risk (ILCR) of arsenic

𝑅𝑐 = 𝐿𝐴𝐷𝐷 × 𝑞 ∗

(2)

165

where Rc is the cancer risk, and q* is the cancer slope factor for i-As. The Integrated Risk

166

Information System (IRIS) (last revised in 1998) lists a q* value of 1.5 (mg/kg BW/day)-1 for i-As,


Page 9 of 32


167

which corresponds to skin cancer.26

168

BW/day)-1 for bladder and lung cancer based on epidemiologic literatures.27

169

susceptibility is well-known to depend on ethnicity and region, but no specific data on Chinese

170

population for arsenic exposure is available. Thus, the q* values established from the U.S.

171

population were adjusted with an ethnicity factor of 0.86, which had been used in estimating the

172

lung cancer risk of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon exposure for Asian populations.28

In 2010, the USEPA proposed a q* value of 25.7 (mg/kg The cancer

173 174 175

The non-carcinogenic risk of arsenic ingestion was estimated as: 𝐻𝑄 =

𝐴𝐷𝐷

(3)

𝑅𝑓𝐷

176

where HQ is the hazard quotient, ADD is the average daily dose and is approximated as LADD

177

here, and RfD is the reference dose for oral exposure.

178

i-As, which is recommended by the IRIS27, was adopted here.

179

below 1.0, while non-carcinogenic effects may occur when it exceeds this threshold.

A RfD value of 3×10-4 mg/kg BW/day for No significant risk exists at HQ

180 181

The human variability in genetic polymorphism and other uncertainty factors in the risk

182

estimation were accounted for by Monte Carlo simulation.

The total arsenic contents in chicken

183

tissues were observed to follow log-normal distribution, and the means and standard deviations

184

(STDs) of the log-transformed data were used in the simulation.

185

arsenic content was assumed to follow a normal distribution with a mean of 0.3 and a STD of 0.15,

186

as discussed in Section 3.4.

187

distributions, with means of 48.8 and 25.2 g/day per person for adults in Guangzhou and Lianzhou,

188

respectively (SI Table 3).

189

study in Guangdong province.29

190

59.5 and 57.2 kg, respectively, and the estimated STDs of log-transformed body weights are 0.15

The fraction of i-As in the total

The chicken consumption rates were also assumed to follow normal

The STDs were assumed to be 70% of the means, according to a recent The mean body weights for Guangzhou and Lianzhou adults are



Page 10 of 32

191

and 0.16, respectively, based on the results of a national survey.30 The uncertainty of cancer

192

slope factors and reference dose for oral As exposure was accounted for based on the USEPA’s

193

documents.26,27

194

and lung cancer, and log-transformed RfD were assumed to be 0.16, 0.25, and 0.5, respectively.

195

The genetic susceptibility of cancer risk was adjusted with a factor that was assumed to follow

196

log-normal distribution with a mean of 1 and log-transformed deviation of 0.65.28 Based on the

197

probability distributions of the above parameters, the ILCR and HQ of Guangzhou and Lianzhou

198

populations from consumption of chicken tissues on local markets were assessed with Monte

199

Carlo simulation (10,000 runs using randomly sampled values each time).31

200

independent and identical simulation results could well represent the probability distributions of

201

the estimated ICLR and HQ.

The STDs of log-transformed q* for skin cancer, log-transformed q* for bladder

The large number of

202 203

3. Results and Discussion

204 205

3.1. Total contents and speciation of As in commercial chicken feeds

206 207

Figure 1a depicts the empirical cumulative distribution function for the content of total As in the

208

61 feed samples. The total As contents in the commercial feeds varied largely (0.30-33.3 mg/kg),

209

with a geometric mean (GM) of 1.56 mg/kg.

210

As contents exceeding 2.0 mg/kg, which is the national standard for total arsenic in animal feeds,

211

although this value actually refers to i-As.32

212

samples contained total As above 10.0 mg/kg, and near 5% of them had >30.0 mg/kg of total As.

213

Such high levels of total As in the chicken feeds are indicative of the supplementation of

214

arsenic-based feed additives.

215

the total As content of the feed samples and the fit by a binary mixture model.

Over 30% of the commercial feed samples had total

Furthermore, approximately a quarter of the feed

Figure 1b shows the histogram and probability density function for


It appears that the

Page 11 of 32


216

distribution of total As content in the commercial feeds could be described as a mixture of two

217

log-normal distributions with GM values of 0.66 and 17.5 mg/kg, respectively, which probably

218

correspond to the feeds without and with ROX supplementation. Around 70% of the commercial

219

feeds had total As contents below 1.8 mg/kg, which were probably not supplemented with

220


221 222

Due to budgetary constraints, the contents of major inorganic and organic arsenic species

223

present in the commercial feeds were analyzed in a total of 18 samples randomly selected from the

224

61 samples (Table 1). ROX was not detected in 2/3 of the samples analyzed, which is consistent

225

with the relatively low total As contents observed in most commercial feeds. In the 6 feed

226

samples with ROX detected, its content ranged from 0.10 to 16.1 mg/kg, with a GM of 1.78 mg/kg.

227

The GM of total As contents in these samples was 4.84 mg/kg (range: 0.30 to 18.7 mg/kg), while

228

that in the feed samples without apparent ROX detection was only 0.41 mg/kg (range: 0.20 to 0.57

229

mg/kg).

230

higher contents of i-As (GM: 2.48 mg/kg) compared to those without apparent ROX detection

231

(GM: 0.39 mg/kg), indicating significant contamination of the commercial feeds by inorganic

232

arsenic compounds. In addition, i-As accounted for more than half of the total As contents in

233

most of the feed samples with ROX detected (5 out of 6). The elevated levels of i-As probably

234

occurred as an impurity (i.e., unreacted inorganic arsenic compounds) from the production of ROX.

235

A nationwide survey of animal feeds conducted in 2012 found that the feed products from 34

236

manufacturers did not meet the safety requirements, and around half of them contained arsenic

237

exceeding the allowable limit.33 The inorganic arsenic might also result from degradation of

238

ROX in the feeds during storage and handling, as a variety of microbes are capable of degrading

239

ROX,34-38 although the actual contribution of this deserves further investigation.

It is worth noting that the feed samples with measurable ROX contents also had much

240 ACS Paragon Plus 10 Environment


241

Page 12 of 32

According to the hygiene standard for animal feeds in China, the maximum allowable dose of

242

ROX in chicken feeds is 14.2 mg/kg as As (50 mg/kg as ROX).23

243

feed samples are mostly in compliance with this limit. However, significant portion of the

244

commercial feeds with ROX detection also contained i-As at levels above the allowable limit (2

245

mg/kg), while none of the samples without detectable ROX had >2.0 mg/kg of i-As.

246

survey in Guangdong province also reported that elevated levels of i-As occurred in the chicken

247

feed samples with ROX detection.22

248

particularly i-As, can greatly elevate the potential of arsenic accumulation in the bodies of farmed

249

animals, which not only exerts toxic effect on the animals, but also poses direct health risk to the

250

consumers of animal meat products.

The contents of ROX in the

A recent

Feed products with unsafe levels of arsenic species,

251 252

3.2. Total contents of As in chicken tissues

253 254

Figure 2 shows the empirical cumulative distribution functions for the total As contents in

255

various types of chicken tissues (liver, gizzard, heart, kidney, breast, and drumstick).

Results of

256

LSD test indicate that the total contents of As in livers and gizzards were significantly higher than

257

those in the muscle tissues (breast and drumstick) (SI Table 4). In general, livers contained the

258

highest levels of total As, with 11 of the 124 liver samples (8.9%) having >0.5 mg/kg of total

259

arsenic (wet weight), which is the upper limit allowed for meat products in China.39 In contrast,

260

none of the 110 muscle samples (breast and drumstick) contained total As above this limit.

261

results are consistent with the previous findings that livers had the highest contents of arsenic

262

among chicken tissues.5,9,40

263

significant positive correlations with those in the other tissues (drumstick, heart, kidney, and

264

gizzard) of the same chickens (SI Table 5). It is also noted that the total As contents in chicken

265

tissues from Guangdong, China were comparable with those reported in the U.S. before the

These

The contents of total arsenic in livers were also found to have


Page 13 of 32

266


phase-out of arsenic-based feed additives in poultry production (SI Table 4).

267 268

Table 2 compares the arsenic contents in chicken tissue samples collected from the live poultry

269

markets in Guangzhou and Lianzhou.

In general, the giblet and muscle samples from Guangzhou

270

had higher levels of total As than those from Lianzhou.

271

the muscle samples from these two locations showed statistically significant difference (27.1 vs.

272

15.6 g/kg). This probably resulted from the wide use of arsenic-based feed additives in factory

273

farms, which were the dominant source for chickens on the markets in Guangzhou. In contrast,

274

traditional backyard farms and small family farms still contributed largely to the chicken supply in

275

the predominantly rural and economically under-developed Lianzhou area.

In particular, the GM of As contents in

276 277

3.3. Speciation of As in chicken tissues

278 279

The toxicity of arsenic compounds varies significantly, with inorganic species (i.e., As(III) and

280

As(V)) being much more toxic than organoarsenicals.41,42 Thus chemical speciation of arsenic in

281

the chicken tissues could provide important information on their health risk.

282

analysis was further carried out for 24 tissue samples with relatively high levels of total arsenic.

283

Figure 3 shows the HPLC-ICP-MS chromatograms of AsB, MMA, DMA, i-As, ROX, p-ASA in

284

the extracts of selected chicken liver samples, in comparison with that of a mixed standard.

285

occurrence of ROX in the chicken tissues is indicative of food-borne residues resulting from its

286

administration during farming.

287

which is consistent with the fact that not all commercial feeds had been supplemented with

288


289

be oxidized to As(V) during MAE with an alkaline medium (pH 10.0) and subsequent sample

290

processing in open air. Thus, the contents of i-As in the tissue samples were quantified from the

Arsenic speciation

The

The peak for ROX was absent on one of the chromatograms,

It is worth noting that As(III) in the tissue samples was expected to



Page 14 of 32

291

peaks of As(V), which could be partially contributed by the As(III) originally present in the tissues.

292

Multiple unidentified arsenic species were also detected in the chicken liver samples analyzed.

293

Although ROX fed to the chickens is mostly excreted in unchanged from, it could be metabolized

294

in

295

N-acetyl-4-hydroxyphenylarsonic acid (N-AHPAA) and 4-amino-phenylarsonic acid (4-APAA)

296

are two possible metabolites of ROX that have been detected in the livers of chickens treated with

297

ROX.43,46 N-AHPAA and 4-APAA could well be among the unidentified arsenic species based

298

on preliminary comparison of the elution orders of various arsenic species with those reported by

299

Peng and co-workers.46 Nonetheless, further refinement of our analytical method and validation

300

with authentic standards are necessary to confirm this.

the

liver,43

and

possibly

degraded

by

the

gut

microbiota.34,44,45

301 302

Table 3 summarizes the contents of major inorganic and organic arsenic species detected in the In general, ROX was detected as the major arsenic species (GM: 57.4 g/kg),

303

24 tissue samples.

304

followed by unidentified As species (GM: 57.0 g/kg) and i-As (GM: 52.4 g/kg), in the liver

305

samples, while the contents of ROX were below the detection limit in the muscle and gizzard

306

samples.

307

detected in most of the samples, including all livers.

308

p-ASA was not detected in any of the feed samples analyzed.

309

particular sample probably resulted from the misuse of feed additives. The relatively low levels

310

of DMA and MMA in the tissues could be attributed to metabolism of the inorganic and organic

311

arsenic compounds ingested from drinking water and chicken feeds. Studies have shown that

312

chicken and mammalian gut microbiota can convert i-As to DMA and MMA.45,47

313

frequently detected in chicken livers (15 out of 18), while DMA occurred in all the muscle and

314

gizzard samples.

p-ASA was detected in only one tissue sample, while unidentified arsenic species were Used primarily as an additive in swine feed,


Thus its occurrence in the

MMA was

Page 15 of 32


315 316

Table 3 also compares the contents of various arsenic species detected in the chicken tissue

317

samples from the live poultry markets in Guangdong with those reported in the literature.

318

Nachman and co-workers reported that the GM values for the contents of i-As and DMA in the

319

raw meats of chickens farmed in different ways (organic vs. conventional, and with unknown or

320

prohibiting policy on the use of arsenic-based feed additives) on the U.S. markets (before the

321

phase-out of ROX) were 0.7 and 2.7 g/kg, respectively.6

322

contents of corresponding arsenic species detected in the chicken tissues from Guangdong

323

province. In a 35-day feeding study, Liu and co-workers found that i-As occurred at a mean

324

content of 3.1 g/kg in the breast of chickens treated with ROX,4 which is comparable to the level

325

we observed.

326

both control and treatment groups in the study of Liu and co-workers,4 was only detected at low

327

levels in some of the tissue sample.

328

North America was caused by the prevalent use of fish meal as a protein source in chicken feeds.4

329

In contrast, its low occurrence in the chicken tissues in this study could be explained by the fact

330

that the chicken feeds in China were primarily made of corn and soybean meal, with only minor

331

portion of the proteins coming from animals (including fish meal), especially for the finisher feeds.

332

AsB is a non-toxic organoarsenical that occurs commonly in marine animals, and in diverse

333

non-marine organisms as well.48-50 Although consumption of AsB from various food sources

334

contributes significantly to the aggregate arsenic exposure, little risk to human health is expected

335

due to its low toxicity in humans (LD50>104 mg/kg body weight).49,50

These values are much lower than the

It is noted that AsB, which is widely observed in the chicken breast samples from

The frequent occurrence of AsB in the chicken meats from

336 337

Pearson’s correlation analysis showed a moderate positive correlation between i-As and ROX

338

(coefficient of 0.40 and p-value of 0.05) in the chicken livers (SI Table 6), indicating that the



Page 16 of 32

339

inorganic arsenic species might originate from ROX metabolites and/or other ROX-related sources

340

(e.g., elevated levels of i-As found in the feeds with ROX detection).

341

coefficient of 0.81 (p-value

Public Health Risk of Arsenic Species in Chicken Tissues from Live

Recommend Documents