SEGH Articles

Measuring the Bioaccessibility of Potentially Harmful Elements in Soil

01 May 2013
Mark Cave provides some background for bioaccessibility testing and insight into the contribution it has made to the risk assessment industry.
Dr Mark Cave is a leading scientist who has been a major driving force behind the development and adoption of bioaccessibility testing within the risk assessment and contaminated land community.  He is organising an upcoming International Conference in November 2013 at the British Geological Survey, bringing together many world players in bioavailability and bioaccessibility research  Here he provides background for bioaccessibility testing and insight into the contribution it has made to the risk assessment industry.
In terms of human health risk assessment there are three main exposure pathways for a given contaminant present in soil. The largest area of concern is the oral/ingestion pathway followed by the dermal and respiratory exposure routes (Paustenbach, 2000). Whether contaminated soils pose a human health risk depends on the potential of the contaminant to leave the soil and enter the human bloodstream. The use of total contaminant concentrations in soils provides a conservative approach as it assumes that all of the metal present in the soil can enter the bloodstream. Results from animal tests e.g. (Denys et al., 2012) suggest that contaminants in a soil matrix maybe absorbed to a lesser extent and show fewer toxic effects compared to the same concentration of soluble salts of the contaminants in a food or liquid matrix.
There is, therefore, a clear need for a practical methodology that measures the fraction of the contaminant in the soil that, through oral ingestion, can enter the systemic circulation of the human body and cause toxic effects. This is known as the oral bioavailability and can be formally defined as the fraction of an administered dose that reaches the central (blood) compartment from the gastrointestinal tract (Paustenbach, 2000). This term must not to be confused with the oral bioaccessibility of a substance, which is defined as the fraction that is soluble in the gastrointestinal environment and is available for absorption (Paustenbach, 2000).
Since bioavailability data is essentially related to the amount of contaminant in the animal/human bloodstream the data must be produced from the dosing of animals with contaminated soil and the subsequent measurement of the contaminant in the blood or organs of the animal; these are known as in-vivo animal models. Bioaccessibility data, however, is normally determined in a test tube environment (in-vitro) and represents the amount of contaminant dissolved in the gastrointestinal tract prior to crossing the mucosal walls. The amount of pollutant which is actually absorbed by an organism is generally less than or equal to the amount which is mobilised (Paustenbach, 2000). Bioaccessibility extraction tests are generally based around the gastrointestinal parameters of young children (0-3 yr). This age group is thought to be at most risk from accidental ingestion of soil. Also, since children can absorb a higher percentage of contaminant through the digestive system than adults, they are more susceptible to adverse health effects (Hamel et al., 1998).
Mammal dosing trials are time consuming and expensive. To supersede the use of animals in determining the bioavailability of potentially harmful elements for human health risk assessment, or to estimate bioavailability where animal studies are not available, a potential alternative is the use of in-vitro tests.
A number of in vitro bioaccessibility tests for mimicking human ingestion have been reported in the literature. As a result of research carried out by the Bioaccessibility Research Group of Europe (BARGE) and other research groups it was clear that the different bioaccessibility tests showed similar trends when used on the same soil samples, but the different operating conditions for each test produced widely ranging bioaccessibility values between the methods (Oomen et al., 2002). To overcome this problem, BARGE undertook a joint decision to progress the development of a harmonised in vitro bioaccessibility method (the Unified BARGE Method – UBM).
The chosen method was the RIVM method (Versantvoort et al., 2004). A schematic outline of the method is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 schematic outline of the BARGE unified method

The UBM has now undergone initial inter-laboratory trials (Wragg et al., 2011) and been validated against an in-vivo model (Denys et al., 2012)and has become widely accepted as the method of choice in European Countries.

In a study of the financial impact of research carried out for the Natural Environment Research Council by the British Geological Survey (Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), 2009) examples of the use of bioaccessibility testing were given that showed that:

i) In one case the assessment enabled the re-use of existing site materials as part of the land remediation process, which subsequently led to reduced costs of approximately £3.75 million. In addition, approximately 3,750 lorry trips to landfill were avoided and 105 tonnes of CO2 equivalent were saved. 

ii) In another example, BGS worked with Land Quality Management and University of Nottingham staff to save between £7-£30 million remediation expenses on one site. The more accurate bioaccessibility testing not only reassured local residents, but also allowed the stalled housing market in the area to restart.

Across England, there are an estimated 15,470 hectares of land in need of remediation. The cost of remediating this land is between £100,000-£325,000 per hectare, giving a potential market of £1.5-£5.0 billion. The research methods developed by BGS have the potential to save between £3.9 million and £12.6 million per year in remediating derelict land for development. Over a 20 year period, these cost savings are estimated to have a Net Present Value of between £55.0 million and £178.6 million.

The method is also being used on a national scale to provide bioaccessibility maps arsenic and Pb (Appleton et al., 2012a, b). Figure 2 shows an example of how a combination of the UBM test and data modelling has produced a map of the bioaccessible lead in soils in the Greater London area.


Figure 2 Estimated bioaccessible Pb in topsoils in the Greater London area (solid lines = motorways, major (A, B) and minor roads; Ordnance Survey Strategi data © Crown copyright 2012) (Appleton et al., 2012b)


Bioaccessibility testing cuts across a number of disciplines including chemistry, geochemistry, toxicology, human health and risk assessment but recent collaborative work untaken by research consortia such as the BARGE group have enabled the development of standardised testing protocols which have a direct impact on human health risk assessment and demonstrable economic benefits when used on a national and international scale.

Dr Mark Cave, British Geological Survey


Appleton, J D, Cave, M R, and Wragg, J. 2012a. Anthropogenic and geogenic impacts on arsenic bioaccessibility in UK topsoils. Science of the Total Environment, Vol. in Press.

Appleton, J D, Cave, M R, and Wragg, J. 2012b. Modelling lead bioaccessibility in urban topsoils based on data from Glasgow, London, Northampton and Swansea, UK. Environmental Pollution, Vol. in Press.

BARGE. Bioaccessibility Research Group of Europe. Cave, M. [cited November 27]. 

Denys, S, Caboche, J, Tack, K, Rychen, G, Wragg, J, Cave, M, Jondreville, C, and Feidt, C. 2012. In Vivo Validation of the Unified BARGE Method to Assess the Bioaccessibility of Arsenic, Antimony, Cadmium, and Lead in Soils. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 46, 6252-6260.

Hamel, S C, Buckley, B, and Lioy, P J. 1998. Bioaccessibility of metals in soils for different liquid to solid ratios in synthetic gastric fluid. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 32, 358-362.

Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). 2009. Bioaccessibility Testing of Contaminated Land for Threats to Human Health.

Oomen, A G, Hack, A, Minekus, M, Zeijdner, E, Cornelis, C, Schoeters, G, Verstraete, W, Van de Wiele, T, Wragg, J, Rompelberg, C J M, Sips, A, and Van Wijnen, J H. 2002. Comparison of five in vitro digestion models to study the bioaccessibility of soil contaminants. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 36, 3326-3334.

Paustenbach, D J. 2000. The practice of exposure assessment: A state-of-the-art review (Reprinted from Principles and Methods of Toxicology, 4th edition, 2001). Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews, Vol. 3, 179-291. 

Versantvoort, C H M, Van de Kamp, E, and Rompelberg, C J M. 2004. Development and applicability of an in vitro digestion model in assessing the bioaccessibility of contaminants from food. RIVM, RIVM report 320102002/2004 (Bilthoven).

Wragg, J, Cave, M R, Basta, N, Brandon, E, Casteel, S, Denys, S e b, Gron, C, Oomen, A, Reimer, K, Tack, K, and Van de Wiele, T. 2011. An Inter-laboratory Trial of the Unified BARGE Bioaccessibility Method for Arsenic, Cadmium and Lead in Soil. Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 409, 4016-4030.




Keep up to date

Submit Content

Members can keep in touch with their colleagues through short news and events articles of interest to the SEGH community.

Science in the News

Latest on-line papers from the SEGH journal: Environmental Geochemistry and Health

  • Editorial 2018-12-11
  • Chemical fractionation of heavy metals in fine particulate matter and their health risk assessment through inhalation exposure pathway 2018-12-11


    Samples of PM2.5 were collected from an urban area close to a national highway in Agra, India and sequentially extracted into four different fractions: water soluble (F1), reducible (F2), oxidizable (F3) and residual fraction (F4) for chemical fractionation of arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), cobalt (Co), chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni) and lead (Pb). The metals were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy in each fraction. The average mass concentration of PM2.5 was 93 ± 24 μg m−3.The total concentrations of Cr, Pb, Ni, Co, As and Cd in fine particle were 192 ± 54, 128 ± 25, 108 ± 34, 36 ± 6, 35 ± 5 and 8 ± 2 ng m−3, respectively. Results indicated that Cd and Co had the most bioavailability indexes. Risk Assessment Code and contamination factors were calculated to assess the environmental risk. The present study evaluated the potential Pb hazard to young children using the Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic Model. From the model, the probability density of PbB (blood lead level) revealed that at the prevailing atmospheric concentration, 0.302 children are expected to have PbB concentrations exceeding 10 μg dL−1 and an estimated IQ (intelligence quotient) loss of 1.8 points. The predicted blood Pb levels belong to Group 3 (PbB < 5 μg dL−1). Based on the bioavailable fractions, carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks via inhalation exposure were assessed for infants, toddlers, children, males and females. The hazard index for potential toxic metals was 2.50, which was higher than the safe limit (1). However, the combined carcinogenic risk for infants, toddlers, children, males and females was marginally higher than the precautionary criterion (10−6).

  • Effects of steel slag and biochar amendments on CO 2 , CH 4 , and N 2 O flux, and rice productivity in a subtropical Chinese paddy field 2018-12-07


    Steel slag, a by-product of the steel industry, contains high amounts of active iron oxide and silica which can act as an oxidizing agent in agricultural soils. Biochar is a rich source of carbon, and the combined application of biochar and steel slag is assumed to have positive impacts on soil properties as well as plant growth, which are yet to be validated scientifically. We conducted a field experiment for two rice paddies (early and late paddy) to determine the individual and combined effects of steel slag and biochar amendments on CO2, CH4, and N2O emission, and rice productivity in a subtropical paddy field of China. The amendments did not significantly affect rice yield. It was observed that CO2 was the main greenhouse gas emitted from all treatments of both paddies. Steel slag decreased the cumulative CO2 flux in the late paddy. Biochar as well as steel slag + biochar treatment decreased the cumulative CO2 flux in the late paddy and for the complete year (early and late paddy), while steel slag + biochar treatment also decreased the cumulative CH4 flux in the early paddy. The biochar, and steel slag + biochar amendments decreased the global warming potential (GWP). Interestingly, the cumulative annual GWP was lower for the biochar (55,422 kg CO2-eq ha−1), and steel slag + biochar (53,965 kg CO2-eq ha−1) treatments than the control (68,962 kg CO2-eq ha−1). Total GWP per unit yield was lower for the combined application of steel slag + biochar (8951 kg CO2-eq Mg−1 yield) compared to the control (12,805 kg CO2-eq Mg−1 yield). This study suggested that the combined application of steel slag and biochar could be an effective long-term strategy to reduce greenhouse gases emission from paddies without any detrimental effect on the yield.