![Sample our Environment & Sustainability journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5935/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Environment-Sustainability.jpg"})
Abstract
Excreta data obtained from five human subjects and previously analyzed as part of a multicompartment model (Hall, L.L., P.V. Allen, H.L. Fisher, and B. Most. 1995. The kinetics of intravenously administered inorganic mercury in humans. In Kinetic models of trace element and mineral metabolism, ed. K.N.S. Subramanian and M.E. Wastney, 1-21. Boca Raton: CRC Press) were reanalyzed by means of a two-compartment model. The mobile compartment represents mercury of any form that is available for transport throughout the body. The immobile compartment represents mercury in forms that are not available for transport. The model simulates time profiles for body inorganic mercury and for fecal and urinary excretion. According to the model, intravenously administered mercury enters the body in the mobile form. Following administration, two distinct kinetic profiles were observed. In four of five subjects, mobile mercury in the body declined rapidly and the immobile form became dominant within 6 days. In these subjects, fecal excretion profiles were characterized by an initial phase dominated by excretion of mobile mercury lasting up to 6 days. This was followed by a slower phase during which mobile and immobile mercury were excreted in varying amounts. A similar pattern was seen in urinary profiles, but the initial phase is shorter and less pronounced. In each of these subjects, immobile mercury accounted for 84–94% of the total cumulative urinary excretion. The fifth subject showed a unique kinetic profile. Conversion of mobile to immobile mercury was slow and the two forms did not reach equivalence until approximately 70 days after dosing. Despite this fact, approximately 99% of fecally excreted mercury and 100% of urinary mercury originated in the immobile compartment. Possible explanations for the different profiles are discussed within the context of the model.
Keywords:
Acknowledgments
We wish to thank Dr John C. Smith for providing us with the human subject data used in our analysis.