Assessment of four commonly employed in vitro arsenic bioaccessibility assays for predicting in vivo relative arsenic bioavailability in contaminated soils

Albert L. Juhasz, John Weber, Euan Smith, Ravi Naidu, Matthew Rees, Allan Rofe, Tim Kuchel, Lloyd Sansom

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    127 Citations (Scopus)


    Currently, a number of in vitro methods are in use worldwide to assess arsenic (As) bioaccessibility in soils. However, a dearth of research has been undertaken to compare the efficacy of the in vitromethodsfor estimating in vivo relativeAsbioavailability. In this study, As bioaccessibility in contaminated soils (n ) 12) was assessed using four in vitro assays (SBRC, IVG, PBET, DIN). In vitro results were compared to in vivo relative As bioavailabilitydata(swineassay)toascertainwhichmethodologies best correlate with in vivo data. Arsenic bioaccessibility in contaminated soils varied depending on the in vitro method employed. For the SBRC and IVG methods, As bioaccessibility generally decreased when gastric-phase values were compared to the intestinal phase. In contrast, extending the PBET and DIN assays from the gastric to the intestinal phase resulted in an increase in As bioaccessibility for some soils tested. Comparison of in vitro and in vivo results demonstrated that the in vitro assay encompassing the SBRC gastric phase provided the best prediction of in vivo relative As bioavailability (R2) 0.75, Pearson correlation) 0.87). However, relative As bioavailability could also be predicted using gastric or intestinal phases of IVG, PBET, and DIN assays but with varying degrees of confidence (R2) 0.53-0.67, Pearson correlation) 0.73-0.82).

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)9487-9494
    Number of pages8
    JournalEnvironmental Science and Technology
    Issue number24
    Publication statusPublished or Issued - 15 Dec 2009

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Chemistry(all)
    • Environmental Chemistry

    Cite this