TY - JOUR
T1 - Erratum to
T2 - “Evaluating oral and inhalation bioaccessibility of indoor dust-borne short- and median-chain chlorinated paraffins using in vitro Tenax-assisted physiologically based method” [J. Hazard. Mater. 402 (2021) 123449] (Journal of Hazardous Materials (2021) 402, (S0304389420314382), (10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123449))
AU - Du, Xinyu
AU - Zhou, Yihui
AU - Li, Jun
AU - Wu, Yan
AU - Zheng, Ziye
AU - Yin, Ge
AU - Qiu, Yanling
AU - Zhao, Jianfu
AU - Yuan, Guoli
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2021/3/5
Y1 - 2021/3/5
N2 - In the work published in Journal of Hazardous Materials (volume 402, 2020, 123449), there was an error in the section of “2.5. Inhalation bioaccessibility measurement”. Current incorrect version: “According to PBET by Kademoglou et al. (2018), 0.1 g of spiked dust sample was combined in 50 mL glass tube with 20 mL of each artificial lung fluid separately, incubated at 37 °C, and shaken at 150 rpm for 15 days, which basically represented the long-term retention of inhaled particles in the human lung (Boisa et al., 2014; Sturm, 2007; Zeng et al., 2019).” “The procedure used for lung simulation was modified from those described by Kademoglou et al. (2018) and Xie et al. (2018). In brief, 0.1 g of spiked dust sample was combined in 50 mL glass tube with 20 mL of each artificial lung fluid separately, incubated at 37 °C, and shaken at 150 rpm for 15 days, which basically represented the long-term retention of inhaled particles in the human lung (Boisa et al., 2014; Sturm, 2007; Zeng et al., 2019).” None of the results or the conclusions of the paper are affected by this erratum. The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused.
AB - In the work published in Journal of Hazardous Materials (volume 402, 2020, 123449), there was an error in the section of “2.5. Inhalation bioaccessibility measurement”. Current incorrect version: “According to PBET by Kademoglou et al. (2018), 0.1 g of spiked dust sample was combined in 50 mL glass tube with 20 mL of each artificial lung fluid separately, incubated at 37 °C, and shaken at 150 rpm for 15 days, which basically represented the long-term retention of inhaled particles in the human lung (Boisa et al., 2014; Sturm, 2007; Zeng et al., 2019).” “The procedure used for lung simulation was modified from those described by Kademoglou et al. (2018) and Xie et al. (2018). In brief, 0.1 g of spiked dust sample was combined in 50 mL glass tube with 20 mL of each artificial lung fluid separately, incubated at 37 °C, and shaken at 150 rpm for 15 days, which basically represented the long-term retention of inhaled particles in the human lung (Boisa et al., 2014; Sturm, 2007; Zeng et al., 2019).” None of the results or the conclusions of the paper are affected by this erratum. The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85095989722
U2 - 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124233
DO - 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124233
M3 - 评论/辩论
C2 - 33191033
AN - SCOPUS:85095989722
SN - 0304-3894
VL - 405
JO - Journal of Hazardous Materials
JF - Journal of Hazardous Materials
M1 - 124233
ER -