A Detailed Urinary Excretion Time Course Study of Captan and Folpet Biomarkers in Workers for the Estimation of Dose, Main Route-of-Entry and Most Appropriate Sampling and Analysis Strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Captan and folpet are two fungicides largely used in agriculture, but biomonitoring data are mostly limited to measurements of captan metabolite concentrations in spot urine samples of workers, which complicate interpretation of results in terms of internal dose estimation, daily variations according to tasks performed, and most plausible routes of exposure. This study aimed at performing repeated biological measurements of exposure to captan and folpet in field workers (i) to better assess internal dose along with main routes-of-entry according to tasks and (ii) to establish most appropriate sampling and analysis strategies. The detailed urinary excretion time courses of specific and non-specific biomarkers of exposure to captan and folpet were established in tree farmers (n = 2) and grape growers (n = 3) over a typical workweek (seven consecutive days), including spraying and harvest activities. The impact of the expression of urinary measurements [excretion rate values adjusted or not for creatinine or cumulative amounts over given time periods (8, 12, and 24 h)] was evaluated. Absorbed doses and main routes-of-entry were then estimated from the 24-h cumulative urinary amounts through the use of a kinetic model. The time courses showed that exposure levels were higher during spraying than harvest activities. Model simulations also suggest a limited absorption in the studied workers and an exposure mostly through the dermal route. It further pointed out the advantage of expressing biomarker values in terms of body weight-adjusted amounts in repeated 24-h urine collections as compared to concentrations or excretion rates in spot samples, without the necessity for creatinine corrections.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".