This study investigated the concentration profiles and geographical variability of contaminants in house dust across Europe. A collaborative trial (CT) was organized by the NORMAN network using pooled dust and advanced chromatographic and mass spectrometric techniques combined with suspect screening and non-target screening (NTS). Over 1200 anthropogenic compounds were tentatively identified. Additionally, seventy-five individual samples were subjected to target analysis and NTS. The median concentrations of most contaminants varied <3-fold across Europe, and the contaminant profile of European dust was similar to that of North American dust, which was investigated in a previous CT. This similarity may be attributed to the use of similar consumer articles and building materials throughout the developed world. Multivariate data analysis revealed geographical trends in contaminant distribution, with north-south gradients across Europe. Geographical trends were more frequently found for compounds with rapid release (pharmaceuticals, personal care products, fragrances, pesticides, biocides) and smoke-related compounds. The concentrations of chlorinated paraffins, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), perfluorinated alkyl substances and stimulants generally increased from north to south, whereas the biocides levels decreased from north to south. Despite widespread presence of in-use contaminants in dusts, some of the highest risks come from compounds that have been restricted for decades or more. These include di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 118 and polybrominated diphenyl ethers 47, 99, and 153. DEHP remains the most abundant contaminant in European house dust, while the other compounds are classified as persistent organic pollutants (POPs). Moreover, there is a striking lack of reliable toxicity data, particularly for emerging compounds. For instance, although acceptable daily intakes (ADIs) were examined for 202 compounds, only 46 had consensus-based ADI values. The results highlight the need for proactive measures to prevent hazardous chemicals from entering the market and for careful selection of substitute chemicals, when such are needed, to avoid regrettable substitutions.

• Klíčová slova
• Geographical trends, House dust, Human exposome, Mass spectrometry, Organic contaminant profiling, Risk assessment,
• MeSH
• hodnocení rizik MeSH
• látky znečišťující vzduch analýza   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• monitorování životního prostředí * MeSH
• polycyklické aromatické uhlovodíky analýza   MeSH
• prach * analýza   MeSH
• znečištění vzduchu ve vnitřním prostředí analýza   statistika a číselné údaje   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• Geografické názvy
• Evropa MeSH
• Názvy látek
• látky znečišťující vzduch MeSH
• polycyklické aromatické uhlovodíky MeSH
• prach * MeSH

Untargeted analysis of a composite house dust sample has been performed as part of a collaborative effort to evaluate the progress in the field of suspect and nontarget screening and build an extensive database of organic indoor environment contaminants. Twenty-one participants reported results that were curated by the organizers of the collaborative trial. In total, nearly 2350 compounds were identified (18%) or tentatively identified (25% at confidence level 2 and 58% at confidence level 3), making the collaborative trial a success. However, a relatively small share (37%) of all compounds were reported by more than one participant, which shows that there is plenty of room for improvement in the field of suspect and nontarget screening. An even a smaller share (5%) of the total number of compounds were detected using both liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Thus, the two MS techniques are highly complementary. Most of the compounds were detected using LC with electrospray ionization (ESI) MS and comprehensive 2D GC (GC×GC) with atmospheric pressure chemical ionization (APCI) and electron ionization (EI), respectively. Collectively, the three techniques accounted for more than 75% of the reported compounds. Glycols, pharmaceuticals, pesticides, and various biogenic compounds dominated among the compounds reported by LC-MS participants, while hydrocarbons, hydrocarbon derivatives, and chlorinated paraffins and chlorinated biphenyls were primarily reported by GC-MS participants. Plastics additives, flavor and fragrances, and personal care products were reported by both LC-MS and GC-MS participants. It was concluded that the use of multiple analytical techniques was required for a comprehensive characterization of house dust contaminants. Further, several recommendations are given for improved suspect and nontarget screening of house dust and other indoor environment samples, including the use of open-source data processing tools. One of the tools allowed provisional identification of almost 500 compounds that had not been reported by participants.

• Klíčová slova
• Collaborative trial, Complementary analytical techniques, House dust, Mass spectrometry, Suspect and nontarget analysis,
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH