Spectroscopic indicators for cytotoxicity of chlorinated and ozonated

Subscriber access provided by University of Florida | Smathers Libraries

Article

Spectroscopic indicators for cytotoxicity of chlorinated and ozonated effluents from wastewater stabilization ponds and activated sludge Nedal Massalha, Shengkun Dong, Michael J Plewa, Mikhail Borisover, and Thanh H. Nguyen Environ. Sci. Technol., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b05510 • Publication Date (Web): 23 Jan 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on January 23, 2018

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

161x115mm (96 x 96 DPI)

ACS Paragon Plus Environment


1

Spectroscopic indicators for cytotoxicity of chlorinated and ozonated effluents

2

from wastewater stabilization ponds and activated sludge

3

Nedal Massalha,†⊥* Shengkun Dong,†⊥‡ Michael J. Plewa,§‡ Mikhail Borisover,□

4

Thanh H. Nguyen†‡

5 6

Manuscript submitted to Environmental Science & Technology

7 8

†Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,

9

§ Department of Crop Sciences,

10

‡Safe Global Water Institute,

11

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States □

12 13

Institute of Soil, Water and Environmental Sciences, The Volcani Center, A.R.O., P.O.B. 15159, RishonLeZion7505101, Israel

14 15 16

Word count = 3989 + 2100 (figures) = 6089

17 18 19 20

*

21

Nedal Massalha; e-mail: [email protected]

Author to whom correspondence should be addressed:

1 Environment ACS Paragon Plus

Page 2 of 32

Page 3 of 32


22

ABSTRACT

23

We investigated chronic mammalian cell cytotoxicity of wastewaters from four sources and their

24

optical spectroscopic properties with or without chlorination or ozonation. Samples from effluents

25

of activated sludge, nitrification tower, facultative waste stabilization pond, and maturation waste

26

stabilization pond were either chlorinated or ozonated. The wastewater samples were analyzed for

27

fluorescence excitation emission matrix, specific fluorescence index (SFI), and specific UV

28

absorbance at 254 nm (SUVA). Before and after disinfection the wastewater samples were

29

quantitatively analyzed for in vitro mammalian cell cytotoxicity. We found that the organic

30

extracts from the ozonated samples induced lower cytotoxicity responses than those from the

31

chlorinated or the non-disinfected samples. To develop correlations between SFI, SUVA, and

32

cytotoxicity, we analyzed 21 independent samples. Significant linear correlations found among

33

these samples suggest that under the tested conditions, cytotoxicity was preferentially influenced

34

by the fluorescence and SUVA of their composite organic agents. These two spectroscopic

35

parameters may be used as indicators for the potential toxicity of non-disinfected, ozonated, or

36

chlorinated municipal wastewater.

37



38

INTRODUCTION

39

Wastewater reuse is an important component of sustainable wastewater management practices

40

worldwide.1 Because of severe limits to fresh water resources, reuse of treated wastewater for

41

irrigation has increased.2 In many regions of the USA the availability of fresh water for irrigation

42

has been diminished because of climate change and droughts.3–5 Employing treated wastewater for

43

agriculture irrigation reduces the demand on fresh source waters and enhances soil enrichment

44

with nutrients from the effluents.6–8

45

Wastewater for safe reuse demands that effluents be disinfected.9 Wastewater effluents contain

46

complex organic compounds from influent organics and biodegradation byproducts formed during

47

treatment processes.10 Pathogens can be inactivated by disinfecting the effluent wastewater;

48

however, toxic disinfection byproducts (DBPs) are generated.11 The formation of uncharacterized

49

DBPs is a public health concern

50

wastewater.17–19 Chlorination is the most commonly used disinfectant for water and wastewater.20

51

Ozone, an alternative disinfectant to chlorine, can inactivate even chlorine-resistant pathogens in

52

drinking water 20,21 and lower the toxicity of wastewaters.22–24

12–16

and some DBPs are more toxic than the organics in the

53

Measurements of UV absorption and fluorescence of treated wastewater have been found to

54

relate to the occurrence of DBPs. For example, specific absorbance at 254 nm (SUVA)25,26 and

55

fluorescence index (FI)27,28 were used as surrogate measurements for dissolved organic matter

56

(DOM) aromaticity and molecular weight to predict the formation of DBPs. Fluorescence of DOM

57

in treated water was also linked to the formation of chlorinated DBPs.29 The three-dimensional

58

fluorescence excitation emission-matrices (EEMs) were used as a basis for fingerprint information

59

and on-line monitoring of DOM, with the aim of predicting DBP formation potential during water


Page 4 of 32

Page 5 of 32


60

treatment.30–32 Several methods were used to quantitatively analyze the EEMs, for example

61

conventional peak-picking, regional integration, and multivariate data analysis such as the parallel

62

factor method (PARAFAC).33–35 Changes in EEMs fluorescence intensities after oxidation were

63

related to DBPs formation.29,36 While the links between UV absorption and fluorescence of

64

disinfected wastewater with DBP formation have been established, the potential correlations

65

between mammalian cell cytotoxicity and these commonly measured properties of the wastewater

66

have not been explored.

67

To fill this knowledge gap, the objectives of this study were to (i) examine the relationship

68

between mammalian cell cytotoxicity and fluorescence indices, and mammalian cell cytotoxicity

69

and UV absorbance properties, and (ii) establish correlations, if any, between mammalian cell

70

cytotoxicity vs. fluorescence indices and UV absorbance properties, two commonly measured

71

water quality parameters, in different municipal wastewater effluents before and after disinfection

72

by chlorination or ozonation. To our knowledge, this study is the first to demonstrate that

73

cytotoxicity of municipal wastewater can be inferred from commonly measured fluorescence and

74

UV-absorbance spectral indicators.

75

MATERIALS AND METHODS

76

Sampling and Characterization of Wastewaters. Four sources of treated municipal wastewaters

77

were sampled in two wastewater treatment sites in Illinois, USA: (i) the effluent of a secondary

78

clarifier, which is part of an activated sludge treatment plant (ASE), (ii) the effluent of a

79

nitrification tower (NIT), which was fed by a blend of trickling filter and activated sludge effluents

80

(iii) the effluent of an aerated waste stabilization pond (AWSP), and (iv) the effluent of a

81

maturation waste stabilization pond (MWSP). AWSP and MWSP were from the same treatment



82

plant that employed passive ponds. A 50 L ASE sample was taken from the effluent of a secondary

83

clarifier. A volume of 30 L was taken from the effluent of the nitrification tower. Two 50 L

84

samples, one each from AWSP and MWSP, two ponds in series, were taken directly from the

85

upper 30 cm of the ponds’ surface. The typical hydraulic retention time of ASE is 12 to 18 h, while

86

the typical hydraulic retention times are between 4 to 8 days for AWSP and 30 to 40 days for

87

MWSP. All samples were transported and stored in the dark at 4°C in 20 L polyethylene (PE)

88

containers until extraction and analysis. Prior to filtration and disinfection, the source samples

89

were characterized by the total chemical oxygen demand (COD) using the HACH (Loveland, CO)

90

low range COD digestion vials according to USEPA Reactor Digestion Method,37 and by the

91

volatile suspended solids (VSS).38 Before disinfection and concentration of the effluents, in order

92

to remove coarse particles, the wastewater samples were passed through Grade 1:11 µm

93

Whatman® filters pre-washed with deionized water. The filtrate was further transferred through

94

1.6 µm Millipore glass fiber filters followed by 0.45 µm pre-washed nitrocellulose membranes.

95

After filtration the samples were analyzed for total organic carbon (TOC) by a Shimadzu TOC

96

analyzer (Columbia, MD) and ammonia nitrogen using the HACH Salicylate kit.39 The measured

97

wastewater parameters are presented in the supporting information (Table 1SI).

98

Disinfection Experiments. Chlorination and ozonation disinfection experiments were conducted

99

with the 0.45 µm filtrate of MWSP, AWSP, ASE, and NIT samples. The filtered samples of

100

MWSP, AWSP, and ASE were given the acronyms MWSP1, AWSP1, and ASE1. Chlorination

101

was conducted in multiple US EPA approved 4 L amber glass bottles. A volume of 1.85 mL of

102

sodium hypochlorite solution (Ricca Chemical, TX) with 27 g/L free chlorine was added to each

103

4 L wastewater sample, yielding an applied chlorine concentration of 12.5 mg/L as Cl2.

104

Preliminary experiments were done to guarantee the presence of free chlorine after 30 min reaction


Page 6 of 32

Page 7 of 32


105

time using the US EPA DPD Method with the HACH kit (Table 2SI).40 In brief, initial free chlorine

106

concentrations of 4, 8, 12.5, and 14 mg/L as Cl2 were tested in 20 mL wastewater samples for free

107

residual chlorine after 30 min reaction. The bottles were sealed, kept in the dark, and stirred with

108

magnetic bars for 30 min, after which the samples were measured for free chlorine and quenched

109

with 1 mL of 0.1 M sodium thiosulfate (E K Industries, IL) to each 4 L wastewater sample. As

110

described in the previous studies,22,23 ozonation experiments were conducted in a 10 L glass reactor

111

agitated by a magnetic bar. Ozone was produced by a micro-channel plasma ozone generator (EP

112

Purification Inc., IL) fed by an oxygen concentrator (Airsep, NY). The ozone-containing gas was

113

bubbled through a stone diffuser into cold, deionized, distilled water (4°C) for at least 15 min. The

114

aqueous ozone concentration was detected continuously with an ultraviolet spectrometer

115

(Beckman Coulter Life Sciences, IN) at λ = 258 nm (ε = 3000 M−1 cm−1).41 The ozonated water

116

was then quickly mixed with the wastewater samples to produce an applied ozone concentration

117

of 3 mg/L. The reactor was subsequently capped and the ozonated samples were incubated for 24

118

h to ensure the absence of residual ozone.

119

Sample Concentration. Dissolved wastewater organics were adsorbed and concentrated by

120

passing the wastewater samples through a chromatography column with a mixture of 110 mL each

121

of XAD-2 (Amberlite XAD-2, Sigma-Aldrich, MO) and XAD-8 (Supelite DAX-8, Sigma-Aldrich,

122

MO) resins. For 72 h, the resins were Soxhlet-cleaned with spectroscopic grade (Fisher Optima)

123

methanol, followed by ethyl acetate and again with methanol. Details regarding the resins Soxhlet

124

cleaning, conditioning, and the extracting of the adsorbed organics are provided in a previous

125

study42,43 and in the SI. The XAD-2/XAD-8 resin mixture was packed in glass columns. The resin

126

packing was conditioned by acid (1N HCl) and base (1N NaOH) before the water samples were

127

passed through the columns. After passing the acidified samples (40-50 mL H2SO4 per 2L of



128

sample) through the columns, the organics were eluted with Optima grade ethyl acetate (Fisher

129

Scientific, PA), which was vacuum evaporated and dried with nitrogen gas. The organics were

130

dissolved in ACS reagent grade dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) (Fisher Scientific, PA) to a

131

concentration factor of 1×105 fold.

132

Chinese Hamster Ovary Cells. The Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cell line AS52 clone 11-4-2

133

was maintained on glass culture plates in Ham’s F12 medium containing 5% fetal bovine serum

134

(FBS), 1% antibiotics (100 U/mL sodium penicillin G, 100 µg/mL streptomycin sulfate, 0.25

135

µg/mL amphotericin B in 0.85% saline), and 1% glutamine at 37°C in a humidified atmosphere of

136

5% CO2.44

137

CHO Cell Cytotoxicity Assay. The CHO cell chronic cytotoxicity assay measures the reduction

138

in cell density as a function of the wastewater sample concentrates over a period of approximately

139

three to four cell divisions (72 h), using an assay we previously developed for the analysis of

140

individual chemicals as well as for complex water mixtures.15,23,45 Flat-bottom, tissue culture 96-

141

well microplates were employed; 4 replicate wells were prepared for each concentration of each

142

water sample extract. Eight wells were reserved for the blank control consisting of 200 µL of F12

143

+ 5% FBS. The negative control consisted of 8 wells containing 100 µL of a titered CHO cell

144

suspension (3×104 cells/mL) plus 100 µL F12 + 5% FBS. The wells for the remaining columns

145

contained 3,000 CHO cells, F12 + 5% FBS, and a known concentration of wastewater organic

146

extract (total volume per well = 200 µL). To prevent sample evaporation or cross contamination

147

between wells due to evaporation, a sheet of sterile AlumnaSeal™ (RPI Corporation, IL) was

148

pressed over the wells before the microplate was covered. To distribute the cells uniformly, the

149

microplate was placed on a rocking platform for 10 min, and then placed in a humidified tissue

150

culture incubator at 37°C, 5% CO2 for 72 h. After incubation, each well was gently aspirated, fixed 7 Environment ACS Paragon Plus

Page 8 of 32

Page 9 of 32


151

in 100% methanol for 10 min, and stained for 10 min with a 1% crystal violet solution in 50%

152

methanol. The microplate was gently rinsed in tap water, inverted, and tapped dry on paper towels.

153

50 μL of DMSO/methanol (3:1 v/v) was added to each well for 10 min before the microplate was

154

analyzed in a microplate reader for absorbance at 595 nm. The blank-corrected absorbance value

155

of the negative controls (cells with medium only) was set at 100%. The absorbance for each

156

treatment group was converted into a percentage of the negative controls. A concentration-

157

response curve was generated for each wastewater sample extract, and a regression analysis was

158

conducted for each curve. The LC50 values were calculated from each regression analysis, where

159

the LC50 represents the concentration factor that induced a 50% reduction in cell density as

160

compared to the concurrent negative controls. A DMSO control demonstrated that no significant

161

cytotoxicity was induced throughout the solvent concentrations used in these experiments.

162

Spectroscopic Analysis. The fluorescence EEMs were measured at room temperature with a

163

Shimadzu RF-5301PC spectrofluorometer employing a quartz cuvette with 4 × 1.0 cm windows.

164

The slit widths for excitation and emission were 5 nm. Excitation wavelengths varied from 250 to

165

400 nm with increments of 10 nm, and emission wavelengths varied between 280 to 550 nm with

166

1 nm increments. Samples for EEM analysis were diluted with fluorescence-free Milli-Q deionized

167

water to ensure that solution absorbance did not exceed 0.1 cm-1 at wavelengths ≥ 250 nm, thus

168

minimizing the inner filter effect.46 The pH of the filtered samples was within the 8.3 ± 0.2 range.

169

The dilution Milli-Q water was used as the blank for fluorescence EEM to be subtracted from the

170

sample EEM. No fluorescence was detected in Milli-Q water after passing through pre-washed

171

filters.

172

For quantitative analysis of the EEM plots, a peak picking algorithm-based approach was used

173

to determine the maximum peak intensities within pre-defined regions of interest.26,27 Four specific 8 Environment ACS Paragon Plus


174

regions of interest were chosen in excitation emission wavelength boundaries as defined

175

previously:47 humic acid (HA)-like at excitation wavelengths of 280 to 370 nm and emission

176

wavelengths of 400 to 480nm; fulvic acid (FA)-like at excitation wavelengths of 250 to 260 and

177

emission wavelengths of 400 to 460 nm; tryptophan (protein)-like (TP) at excitation wavelengths

178

of 260 to 280 nm and emission wavelengths of 330 to 380 nm; tyrosine (protein)- like (TY) at

179

excitation wavelengths of 260 to 280 nm and emission wavelengths of 290 to 330 nm. Determined

180

EEMs of fluorescence were multiplied by a dilution factor used for sample preparation. The

181

fluorescence index (FI) was taken as the ratio of emission intensities at 470 nm and 520 nm for an

182

excitation at 370 nm.27 The specific fluorescence index (SFI) was calculated as the ratio of FI to

183

the corresponding dissolved organic carbon (DOC). Absorbance at 254 nm (Abs254) was obtained

184

in a 1.0 cm quartz cuvette using an ultraviolet-visible spectrometer (Shimadzu UV-2450). The

185

absorbance value (cm−1) was expressed as the ratio of optical density to optical length (1.0 cm).

186

SUVA, determined by the ratio of UV254 to DOC, is an indicator of the presence of aromatic

187

components in organic matter.26 The values of SUVA were reported in liter per milligram of C per

188

meter (Abs254/DOC × 100).

189

Statistics. The LC50 values were converted into cytotoxicity index values CTI = LC50-1 × 103 for

190

the ANOVA test statistic to determine significant differences amongst the toxicity of the

191

wastewater samples. The statistical power was maintained at ≥ 0.8 at α = 0.05. The values of the

192

DOC-normalized cytotoxicity index (NCTI) were calculated by dividing the mean CTI values by

193

the corresponding DOC of the wastewater sample. Possible correlations between the NCTI and

194

spectroscopic properties were evaluated using the Pearson Product-Moment test (OriginPro, MA).

195

For each correlation, a Pearson Product-Moment correlation coefficient (r) was evaluated to assess

196

possible correlation. All tests were performed at a 95% confidence level (α = 0.05).


Page 10 of 32

Page 11 of 32


197

Additional samples for correlations: To expand the samples size for the correlations of NCTI

198

values vs. SFI and SUVA, nine samples of municipal wastewater were used together with the 12

199

samples from the four different sources to establish the correlations between cytotoxicity and

200

SUVA or fluorescence indices. These samples were taken from different locations and sampling

201

seasons that included early spring, early summer, peak summer, and late fall, encompassing a wide

202

range of water qualities and temperatures. The nine additional samples included four chlorinated

203

and ozonated unfiltered effluents from a facultative waste stabilization pond, and a maturation

204

waste stabilization pond (named chlorinated MWSP2, ozonated MWSP2, chlorinated AWSP2,

205

and ozonated AWSP2), two activated sludge samples taken at different times (named ASE2 and

206

ASE3), and one ozonated sample of ASE3, and two non-disinfected and chlorinated municipal

207

activated sludge effluents in Israel (named IS and chlorinated IS). All 21 samples were processed

208

using the same protocols.

209

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

210

Fluorescence Characteristics of the Studied Wastewater before and after Chlorination or

211

Ozonation. Fluorescence EEMs of the source samples are presented in Figure 1a, 1d,1g, and 1j.

212

The four key fluorescence peaks indicating the presence of the fluorophores in HA, FA, TP, and

213

TY were resolved. For source wastewaters, despite having the highest DOC, MWSP1 had lower

214

fluorescence peaks for all organic fractions than those of AWSP1, ASE1, or NIT (Figure 1a, 1d,

215

1g, 1j and Table 3SI). Comparing non-disinfected wastewater samples from AWSP1 with those

216

from ASE1, the fluorescence peaks of HA, FA, and TP were lower by 53, 17, and 33%,

217

respectively, and higher by 26% in TY (Figure 1d, 1g, and Table 3SI). The fluorescence peaks of

218

HA and FA in the non-disinfected ASE1 and NIT were very close. TP and TY in ASE1 and NIT

219

were also slightly different (Figure 1g, 1j, and Table 3SI). For the MWSP1 sample, chlorination 10 Environment ACS Paragon Plus


220

reduced the fluorescence peaks of HA and FA by 24 and 18%, respectively, and increased TP and

221

TY by 22 and 16%, respectively (Figure 1a, 1b, and Table 4SI). In contrast, ozonation lowered the

222

concentrations of all fluorophores, as compared to those in the non-disinfected MWSP1, by 42,

223

37, 69, and 77% for HA, FA, TP, and TY, respectively (Figure 1a, 1c, and Table 4SI). For both

224

chlorinated and ozonated AWSP1 samples, the fluorescence peaks in the FA region decreased by

225

28 and 34% after chlorination and ozonation as compared to the non-disinfected AWSP1 sample,

226

respectively (Figure 1d, 1e, 1f, and Table 4SI). Chlorination reduced the fluorescence peaks in the

227

regions of TP, TY, and HA of the AWSP sample by 29, 54, and 30%, respectively, while ozonation

228

reduced these fluorescence peaks by 38, 63, and 39%, respectively (Figure 1d, 1e, 1f, and Table

229

4SI). Comparing non-disinfected ASE1 sample to chlorinated ASE1 sample, the latter showed

230

about 36% reduction of the fluorescence peak in the regions of TP and TY, and about 56% for the

231

HA, while ozonation lowered the fluorescence peaks of TP and TY by about 59% and by about

232

47% for FA fluorescence peak (Figure 1g, 1h, 1i, and Table 4SI). For the NIT sample, chlorination

233

reduced the fluorescence peaks of HA, FA, and TP by 32, 18, and 27%, respectively, and increased

234

TY by 17% (Figure 1j, 1h, and Table 4SI). In contrast, ozonation lowered the concentrations of all

235

fluorophores, as compared to those in the non-disinfected NIT, by 79, 65, 54, and 67% for HA,

236

FA, TP, and TY, respectively (Figure 1j, 1i, and Table 4SI).The reduction in wastewater

237

fluorescence after chlorination is in agreement with the observation reported in the previous

238

studies.29,48–50 Possible reasons for the increase in the intensity of fluorescence peak of TP and TY

239

for chlorinated MWSP1, and TY for chlorinated NIT (Table 4SI), after chlorination may include

240

both formation of fluorescent DBPs and a selective degradation of naturally present quenchers of

241

organic matter fluorescence. Consistent with previous observations,51–53 ozonation reduced the

242

fluorescence intensities of major fluorophores, especially protein-like substances in all samples.


Page 12 of 32

Page 13 of 32


243

The observed changes in the EEMs of fluorescence caused by chlorination or ozonation suggest

244

breakdown or alteration of the organics in the treated wastewaters and perhaps the generation of

245

DBPs.53,54

246

CHO Cell Cytotoxicity of Concentrated Effluents. As shown in Figure 2, for non-disinfected

247

samples, ASE1 and AWSP1 have lower cytotoxicity than NIT (P < 0.05, Table 5SI). These three

248

samples were more cytotoxic than MWSP1 samples (P < 0.05, Figure 2, 3, and Table 5SI). The

249

obtained higher cytotoxicity of NIT, compared to the other two secondary effluents AWSP1 and

250

ASE1, is likely because the NIT sample was taken from a nitrification tower fed by a blend of

251

activated sludge and trickling filter effluents. The measured higher cytotoxicity of NIT, compared

252

to the other two secondary effluents AWSP1 and ASE1, is likely due to the fact that the NIT

253

sample was taken from a nitrification tower fed by a blend of activated sludge and trickling filter

254

effluents (Table 1SI). The significant 1.74-fold lower cytotoxicity of MWSP1 compared to

255

AWSP1 (P < 0.05, Table 5SI) indicates that the maturation treatment process reduced the available

256

cytotoxic materials in the wastewater (Figure 2a, 2b, and 3). For disinfected wastewaters,

257

chlorinated samples generated at least 1.1-fold higher cytotoxicity than the non-disinfected

258

controls for ASE1, AWSP1, and NIT, while chlorination of MWSP1 did not change the

259

cytotoxicity (P > 0.05, Figure 3 and Table 5SI). Consistent with previous studies,23,31 ozonated

260

samples were at least 1.6-fold less cytotoxic than the chlorinated samples (Figure 3), and were

261

significantly less cytotoxic than the non-disinfected controls (P < 0.05, Table 5SI). AWSP1 that

262

expressed the highest reduction in cytotoxicity after ozonation (2.4-fold decrease) showed the

263

lowest increase in cytotoxicity after chlorination (1.1-fold increase).



264

MWSP1, the wastewater possessing the lowest cytotoxicity but the highest DOC among the

265

non-disinfected samples, produced the least cytotoxic chlorinated or ozonated wastewaters

266

compared to the disinfected AWSP1, ASE1, and NIT samples (Figure 3).

267

The increase in toxicity after chlorination is in agreement with a previous study,55 likely due to

268

the reactions between chlorine and the organics in wastewaters that produced a number of

269

halogenated aliphatic or aromatic compounds. Ozonation not only efficiently removes wastewater

270

contaminants but also produces byproducts such as aldehydes, ketones, and organic acids56–59 that

271

are in general less toxic than the precursors in wastewater or the halogenated DBPs from

272

chlorination. Our observation that ozonationled to a lower toxicity compared to chlorination is

273

likely a result of the increased degradation of toxic organic compounds in the studied wastewaters

274

by ozone and increased formation of toxic halogenated DBPs with chlorination. These different

275

trends observed for chlorination and ozonation suggest that between the two alternative

276

disinfectants, ozone is a better candidate to minimize cytotoxicity.

277

Correlation Analyses between CHO Cell Cytotoxicity and Spectroscopic Indicators. Linear

278

and positive correlations were found among the DOC-normalized cytotoxicity index (NCTI)

279

values of the non-disinfected, chlorinated, or ozonated samples and SFI values (Figure 4a, 4b, 4c,

280

and Table 6SI). For a given SFI value, the NCTI ascending rank order was as follows: ozonated

Spectroscopic indicators for cytotoxicity of chlorinated and ozonated

Recommend Documents