Established and emerging organophosphate esters (OPEs) and the expansion of an environmental contamination issue: A review and future directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The list of organophosphate esters (OPEs) reported in the environment continues to expand as evidenced by the increasing number of OPE studies in the literature. However, there remains a general dearth of information on more recently produced and used OPEs that are proving to be emerging environmental contaminants. The present review summarizes the available studies in a systematic framework of the current state of knowledge on the analysis, environmental fate, and behavior of emerging OPEs. This review also details future directions to better understand emerging OPEs in the environment. Firstly, we make recommendations that the current structural/practical abbreviations and naming of OPEs be revised and updated. A chemical database (CDB) containing 114 OPEs is presently established based on the suspect list from the current scientific literature. There are 12 established OPEs and a total of 83 emerging OPEs that have been reported in human and/or biota samples. Of the emerging OPEs more than 80% have nearly 100% detection frequencies in samples of certain environmental media including indoor air, wastewater treatment plants, sediment, and fish. In contrast to OPEs considered established contaminants, most emerging OPEs have been identified more recently due to the more pervasive use of high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) based approaches and especially gas or liquid chromatography coupled with HRMS-based non-target analysis (NTA) of environmental sample fractions. Intentional/unintentional industrial use and non-industrial formation are sources of emerging OPEs in the environment. Predicted physical-chemical properties in silico of newer, molecularly larger and more oligomeric OPEs strongly suggest that some compounds such as bisphenol A diphenyl phosphate (BPA-DPP) are highly persistent, bioaccumulative and/or toxic. Limited information on laboratory-based toxicity data has shown that some emerging OPEs elicit harmful effects such as cytotoxicity, development toxicity, hepatotoxicity, and endocrine disruption in exposed humans and mammals. Established, and to a much lesser degree emerging OPEs, have also been shown to transform and degrade in biota and possibly alter their toxicological effects. Research on emerging OPE contaminants is presently limited and more study is warranted on sample analysis methods, source apportionment, transformation processes, environmental behavior, biomarkers of exposure and toxicity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".