Skip to main content
HHS Author Manuscripts logoLink to HHS Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Oct 7.
Published in final edited form as: J Environ Eng Ecol Sci. 2013 Mar 9;2(3):10.7243/2050-1323-2-3. doi: 10.7243/2050-1323-2-3

Mutagenicity of biodiesel or diesel exhaust particles and the effect of engine operating conditions

Elena R Kisin 1, XC Shi 2, Michael J Keane 2, Aleksandar B Bugarski 3, Anna A Shvedova 1,*
PMCID: PMC4596798  NIHMSID: NIHMS718895  PMID: 26457185

Abstract

Background

Changing the fuel supply from petroleum based ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) to biodiesel and its blends is considered by many to be a viable option for controlling exposures to particulate material (PM). This is critical in the mining industry where approximately 28,000 underground miners are potentially exposed to relatively high concentrations of diesel particulate matter (DPM). This study was conducted to investigate the mutagenic potential of diesel engine emissions (DEE) from neat (B100) and blended (B50) soy-based fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) biodiesel in comparison with ULSD PM using different engine operating conditions and exhaust aftertreatment configurations.

Methods

The DPM samples were collected for engine equipped with either a standard muffler or a combination of the muffler and diesel oxidation catalytic converter (DOC) that was operated at four different steady-state modes. Bacterial gene mutation activity of DPM was tested on the organic solvent extracts using the Ames Salmonella assay.

Results

The results indicate that mutagenic activity of DPM was strongly affected by fuels, engine operating conditions, and exhaust aftertreatment systems. The mutagenicity was increased with the fraction of biodiesel in the fuel. While the mutagenic activity was observed in B50 and B100 samples collected from both light-and heavy-load operating conditions, the ULSD samples were mutagenic only at light-load conditions. The presence of DOC in the exhaust system resulted in the decreased mutagenicity when engine was fueled with B100 and B50 and operated at light-load conditions. This was not the case when engine was fueled with ULSD. Heavy-load operating condition in the presence of DOC resulted in a decrease of mutagenicity only when engine was fueled with B50, but not B100 or ULSD.

Conclusions

Therefore, the results indicate that DPM from neat or blended biodiesel has a higher mutagenic potency than that one of ULSD. Further research is needed to investigate the health effect of biodiesel as well as efficiency of DOC or other exhaust aftertreatment systems.

Keywords: Ames Salmonella/microsomal assay, mutagenic activity, biodiesel, diesel exhaust particulate matter, oxidation catalytic converter

Background

Biodiesel is considered an attractive alternative to diesel oil since it can be produced by domestic natural sources, reducing dependence on petroleum-based fuels [1]. Biodiesel can be produced from different plant oils by transesterification of triglycerides from vegetable oils with ethanol [2,3]. The increasing production and consumption of biodiesel has encouraged researchers to assess its hazard and fate in the environment. Specifically, diesel combustion engines are an important component of the industrial and transportation sectors, including numerous mining, agriculture and construction uses. There are concerns, however, with exhaust emissions in regards to potential adverse health effects associated with exposure to diesel particulate matter (DPM). Diesel engine emissions are highly complex mixtures of aerosols and gases. They consist of a wide range of organic and inorganic compounds [4]. Most of the particles from diesel engine exhausts are of nano-scale and therefore readily respirable. These particles potentially have hundreds of chemicals absorbed onto their surfaces, including known and suspected mutagens and carcinogens, e.g. polycyclic hydrocarbons (PAH) and nitrated PAH (nPAH) [5]. The formation of PAH depends on the type of engine, fuel composition, the engine operating conditions and the effectiveness of exhaust aftertreatment [6]. Exposure to diesel engine emissions and their atmospheric transformation products occur often in both environmental and occupational settings. Compared to their parent PAH, most of the resulting compounds generated from the combustion system are mutagens or have an enhanced mutagenic potency [7-9]. A causal relationship of exposure to diesel engine emissions and lung cancer was suggestive for occupational settings but not for the general population [5]. According to two large studies [10,11] conducted among the non-metal miners, diesel exhaust increases the risk of death from lung cancer. The International Agency for Research on Cancer [12], a part of the World Health Organization (WHO), classified diesel engine exhaust as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1) based on sufficient evidences to link exposure to an increased risk of lung cancer.

During recent years, strong efforts have been made to minimize diesel engine emission-related health hazards. This includes improved combustion, use of exhaust aftertreatment, the reduction of sulfur and aromatics content in fuels and lubricating oil, and the introduction of reformulated fuels [4,5]. Various diesel exhaust treatment technologies, such as diesel particulate filter (DPF) systems, disposable filters elements (DEDs), and diesel oxidation catalysts (DOCs) have been implemented. In mining, improvements of ventilation and the curtailment of diesel particulate matter (DPM) and toxic gaseous emissions from existing and new diesel powered equipment are commonly perceived as the most promising tools to meet Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) regulations [4]. The use of biodiesel results in a substantial reduction of unburned hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and PM as compared to diesel emissions [13]. The issue of exposure to DPM and the use of biodiesel blends is particularly critical in the mining industry where approximately 28,000 U.S. underground miners are potentially exposed to relatively high concentrations of DPM [4]. Mine operators are currently using 25-100% biodiesel blends [14,15]. The concentrations of biodiesel in the blends used in underground mining are substantially higher than those used in other on- and off-highway applications [4].

The effects of biodiesel on emissions were found to vary widely, in particular with usage conditions, engine type and age [16-18]. Mine studies showed potential of neat biodiesel [18] and biodiesel blends [19-23] to reduce exposure of underground miners to DPM. However, the combustion of biodiesel in diesel engines typically results in slight increase of nitrogen oxide emissions [24]. The particle-bound volatile organic fractions of DPM [17,25] were found to be higher for biodiesel than for petroleum diesel fuels [17,25]. This may impact the biologic effects and toxicity of biodiesel exhaust particles.

Previous studies have compared the mutagenicity of diesel and biodiesel exhausts using bacterial reverse mutation assay [26,27]. This assay is suited as a screening tool for hydrophobic mutagenic compounds or mixtures, such as PAH from diesel engine emissions [5]. There is conflicting and limited information available regarding the mutagenic potential of biodiesel emissions specific to fuel category, engine type, and operating conditions [28-39].

The purpose of our study is to investigate the effects of soy-based fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) biodiesel, engine operating conditions and exhaust aftertreatment on the mutagenicity of diesel aerosol organic solvent extracts in Salmonella typhimurium. The samples analyzed in this study were collected directly in an underground mining environment of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Lake Lynn Experimental Mine by using the NIOSH Diesel Laboratory.

Methods

Sample collection

The DPM samples were collected at the diesel laboratory in the D-drift of the NIOSH Lake Lynn Experimental Mine. This laboratory was designed to allow evaluation of control technologies and strategies in an underground environment [23,40]. The tests were executed using Isuzu C240 engine rated at 41 kW, one of the most commonly used light-duty engine in US underground coal mines [41]. The engine was operated at four steady-state modes using eddy-current dynamometer (Figure 1). These modes were selected to cover a wide range of engine operating parameters. One of the selected modes at each of the engine speeds was representative of heavy engine loads (M2 and M4), while the other two were representative of light or medium engine loads (M1 and M3). Two exhaust configurations (muffler and muffler plus DOC) were evaluated for M1 and M2 modes. Soy-based FAME biodiesel (B100) was supplied by Stepan Company (Stepansol SB-W, Bordentown, NJ). ULSD supplied by Guttman Oil was used as baseline fuel. The B50 blend was prepared at the site. The fractions of biodiesel and ULSD were determined volumetrically. The DPM samples were collected concurrently on 90 mm Teflon coated glass fiber filters (Pall TX40HI20-WW). The nominal sampling flow rate for each of the sampling stream was 91 lpm. The sampling times were between 120 and 180 min depending on the test. The flow rates were maintained using rotary vane pumps (Gast, Model 1023) and controlled with mass flow controllers (Sierra Instruments Inc., Model 840). The Teflon-coated aluminum cyclone (URG, Model URG-2000-30EH) was used to remove aerosols with D50 larger than 1 μm. The properties of sampled aerosols are published in [23]. Eighteen samples were collected for mutagenicity analysis. Table 1 shows the information on the fuel, the exhaust configuration and engine operating modes pertinent to each of the samples.

Figure 1. Engine operating conditions.

Figure 1

Engine was operated at four steady-state modes. One of the selected modes at each of the engine speeds represented heavy engine load (M2 and M4 with an engine speed of 2950 rpm and 2100 rpm, torque of 108.4 Nm and 138 Nm, and power 34.3 kW and 30.6 kW, respectively), while the other was more representative of light engine load (M1 and M3 with an engine speed of 2950 rpm and 2100 rpm, torque of 63.7 Nm and 73.2 Nm, and power 17.2 kW and 14.9 kW, respectively).

Table 1.

Mutagenicity induced by DPM samples

Exhaust Configuration Engine Mode Fuel Revertants/platea in concentration (μg/plate)
0.0b 13.3 40.0 120.0
Muffler Ml ULSD 18±4.5 27±2.3 49±17.3 67±3.0*
Muffler M2 18±4.5 23±5.0 30±0.8 53±7.9
Muffler M3 18±4.5 24±3.4 40±5.9 71±4.3*
Muffler M4 18±1.0 23±2.0 22±2.3 21±3.3
Muffler+DOC Ml 18±1.2 26±1.6 42±4.4 80±11.7*
Muffler+DOC M2 18±1.2 24±1.2 33±4.8 42±7.7
Muffler Ml B50 18±1.2 22±2.0 50±3.9* 79±1.5*
Muffler M2 18±1.2 28±0.4 58±6.4* 71±4.1*
Muffler M3 18±1.2 25±1.1 42±2.0* 80±9.9*
Muffler M4 18±1.2 18±4.4 16±2.2 28±6.1
Muffler+DOC Ml 18±1.2 29±5.1 40±3.5 73±2.8*
Muffler+DOC M2 18±1.2 29±0.6 37±5.3 60±6.2*
Muffler Ml B100 18±4.5 33±13.1 63±7.2* 128±6.8*
Muffler M2 23±0.6 55±0.6* 84±2.7* 148±25.7*
Muffler M3 23±0.6 26±2.7 49±5.0 73±3.3*
Muffler M4 27±1.1 24±4.9 21±1.1 35±6.0
Muffler+DOC Ml 18±4.5 19±6.1 26±2.1 40±15.2
Muffler+DOC M2 32±1.1 30±1.1 87±3.8* 155±5.5*
a

Mean value of two plates ± standard deviation.

b

Solvent control was shared within each group of samples assayed simultaneously.

*

Positive response.

Samples preparation

Each sample consisted of DPM collected concurrently on two 90 mm filters. The DPM were extracted simultaneously from both filters using 100 ml of acetone and sonicated for 2 hours. The extract was reduced by evaporation in N2 environment and centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 40 minutes. The supernatant was removed and filtered through 25 mm sterile PTFE filter. The filtrate was transferred to a tared sterile brown vial and evaporated to dryness under N2. Twelve milligrams of DPM extract per milliliter of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) was prepared as a stock solution. Samples were diluted further with DMSO to obtain the required concentration.

Ames salmonella assay

The mutagenicity of samples was determined using the preincubation variant of the Ames Salmonella assay system [42]. Results from the previous studies indicate that Salmonella typhimurium strains TA98 and YG1024 gave better mutagenic response than TA100 and YG1029 to DPM tested, and S9 microsomal activation was not necessary for examination of mutagenic activity in DPM [43-45]. Due to the limited amounts of the samples available, only Salmonella typhimurium TA 98 without S9 microsomal activation was used in the study. The cell suspension of Salmonella typhimurium TA98 was prepared by overnight incubation of a small piece of frozen culture in 25ml nutrient broth. The genotype of the bacteria was confirmed following the recommendation by [42]. A sample solution of 10μl, along with 65μl physiological saline, and 25μl of the TA98 cultures were pre-incubated at 37°C for 30 min on a rotary drum incubator before plating. The control was established using DMSO in place of sample solution. After incubation, 2.5ml of molten top agar were added to each sample tube, the contents mixed, and poured onto a Vogel-Bonner minimal media plate. The plates were incubated at 37°C for 48h prior to counting. The conditions of the bacterial background lawn were examined during every experiment in order to know if cytotoxicity appeared in the high concentrations. Three readings of the revertant colonies per plate were scored by an automatic colony counter (Accucount 1000, Biologics Inc., Gainsville, VA) after incubation. The average numbers of revertant colonies per each concentration were calculated. An extract was considered mutagenic if the number of revertants in any of the concentrations tested was two-fold or greater than the control [27] and showed a dose related response. All experiments were repeated twice to confirm the results.

Statistical analysis

Results were compared by One Way ANOVA using the All Pairwise Multiple Comparison Procedures (Holm-Sidak method). All results are presented as mean + standars error of the mean (SEM).

Results

Effects of B50 or B100 in comparison to ULSD

The mutagenic effects of B50 and B100 were compared with those of the ULSD for all four tested engine conditions (Table 1, Figure 2). When engine was equipped with muffler, the concentration dependent mutagenic activity was observed for all samples collected at light-load (M1 and M3) and one of the heavy-load (M2) operating conditions. The mutagenic activity was increased with fraction of biodiesel in the fuel for all those 3 modes. B100 (120 μg/plate) induce the strongest mutagenic effect at M1 and M2 (91% and 179% over ULSD, respectively). At the same conditions, B50 caused only 18% and 34% increase in mutagenicity over ULSD, respectively. B50 and B100 did not induce a significant increase (13% and 3%, respectively) in mutagenic activity when engine was operated under M3 conditions, as compared to ULSD. No positive mutagenic activity was detected for all samples collected at M4 (heavy-load) operating conditions.

Figure 2. Mutagenic activity of DPM samples collected for the engine fueled with ULSD, B50 or B100 and equipped with muffler only at 4 steady-state modes.

Figure 2

ULSD, B50 or B100 samples (0, 13.3, 40 or 120 μg/plate) were incubated at 37° C with the Salmonella typhimurium TA 98 without S9 microsomal activation. Clear columns – control samples (PBS exposure); light gray columns – exposure with 13.3 μg/plate of DPM; Dark gray columns – exposure with 40 μg/plate of DPM; Black columns – exposure with 120 μg/plate of DPM. Data represent mean values (+SEM) of the average number of revertant colonies per sample. Each sample was tested twice in two separate experiments. *positive responses, as evidenced by the number of revertant colonies being at least two-fold greater than the respective control value.

Effect of engine operating conditions on mutagenic activity of DPM

The effects of the four engine operating conditions were studied using the samples collected from engine equipped with a muffler (Table 1 and Figures 3,4 and 5). When engine was fueled with ULSD, the mutagenic activity was observed for the samples collected for light-load engine operating conditions (M1 and M3), but not for heavy-load engine operating conditions (M2 and M4), and only for the highest studied concentration of 120 μg/plate (Figure 3). When engine was fueled with B50 (Figure 4) and B100 (Figure 5), the mutagenic activity was detected at both light-load (M1 and M3) and one of the heavy-load operating conditions (M2 but not M4). Increase in mutagenic activity was concentration dependent for all those 3 modes with the positive response at two highest concentrations (40 and 120 μg/plate). At the lowest studied concentration of 13.3 μg/plate, the mutagenic activity was found only for the engine fueled with B100 and operated at M2 condition (Figure 5).

Figure 3. Effect of engine operating conditions on mutagenic activity of ULSD samples collected for the engine fitted with muffler.

Figure 3

ULSD samples (0, 13.3, 40 or 120 μg/plate) were incubated at 37° C with the Salmonella typhimurium TA 98 without S9 microsomal activation. Clear columns – mode M1; light gray columns – mode M2; Dark gray columns – mode M3; Black columns – mode M4. Data represent mean values (+SEM) of the average number of revertant colonies per sample. Each sample was tested twice in two separate experiments. *positive responses, as evidenced by the number of revertant colonies being at least two-fold greater than the respective control value.

Figure 4. Effect of engine operating conditions on mutagenic activity of B50 samples collected for the engine fitted with muffler.

Figure 4

B50 samples (0, 13.3, 40 or 120 μg/plate) were incubated at 37° C with the Salmonella typhimurium TA 98 without S9 microsomal activation. Clear columns – mode M1; light gray columns – mode M2; Dark gray columns – mode M3; Black columns – mode M4. Data represent mean values (+SEM) of the average number of revertant colonies per sample. Each sample was tested twice in two separate experiments. *positive responses, as evidenced by the number of revertant colonies being at least two-fold greater than the respective control value.

Figure 5. Effect of engine operating conditions on mutagenic activity of B100 samples collected for the engine fitted with muffler.

Figure 5

B100 samples (0, 13.3, 40 or 120 μg/plate) were incubated at 37° C with the Salmonella typhimurium TA 98 without S9 microsomal activation. Clear columns – mode M1; light gray columns – mode M2; Dark gray columns – mode M3; Black columns – mode M4. Data represent mean values (+SEM) of the average number of revertant colonies per sample. Each sample was tested twice in two separate experiments. *positive responses, as evidenced by the number of revertant colonies being at least two-fold greater than the respective control value.

Effect of diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) on mutagenic activity of DPM

The effects of DOC on mutagenic activity of DPM were studied using samples collected for all three fuels and the engine operated at one light-load (M1) and one heavy-load (M2) condition (Table 1, Figure 6). The strongest effects of DOC were observed when the engine was fueled with B100 and operated at mode M1 (Figure 6A). The results for two highest sample concentrations, 40 μg/plate and 120 μg/plate, showed that introduction of this specific DOC in the exhaust system resulted in 59% and 69% decrease in mutagenic activity, respectively. In the cases involving B100 and lowest sample concentrations (13.3 μg/plate), the samples collected for the engine equipped with DOC and operated at M2 exhibited 45.5% lower mutagenic activity than the corresponding sample obtained for the muffler-only configuration (Figure 6B). When the engine was fueled with B50, the effects of DOC were observed only for M2 conditions, demonstrating 12% and 16% decrease in mutagenic activity for two highest sample concentrations, respectively (Figure 6B). No significant effects of DOC were observed when the engine was fueled with ULSD.

Figure 6. Effect of DOC on mutagenic activity of DPM samples collected for the engine operated at 2 steady-state modes M1 (A, light load) and M2 (B, heavy load).

Figure 6

ULSD, B50 or B100 samples (0, 13.3, 40 or 120 μg/plate) were incubated at 37° C with the Salmonella typhimurium TA 98 without S9. Clear columns – control samples (PBS exposure); light gray columns – exposure with 13.3 μg/plate of DPM; Dark gray columns – exposure with 40 μg/plate of DPM; Black columns – exposure with 120 μg/plate of DPM. Data represent mean values (+SEM) of the average number of revertant colonies per sample. Each sample was tested twice in two separate experiments. *p<0.05, vs the engine equipped with muffler only.

Discussion

This study was conducted to investigate the mutagenic effects of soy-based FAME biodiesel. The effects of B50 and B100 were compared to those of ULSD. These effects were examined for four steady state engine operating conditions and two exhaust aftertreatment configurations using Salmonella typhimurium TA98 (frame-shift mutation) assay without metabolic activation (S9).

This is well-known that emissions are influenced by both the engine (and exhaust aftertreatment system) as well as the fuel being combusted [46]. Accordingly, results of our study clearly indicate that mutagenic activity of DPM was strongly affected by the fuel formulation, engine operating conditions, and exhaust aftreatment. For the engine fueled with ULSD, only the DPM samples collected for light-load engine operating conditions were mutagenic. These results are consistent with the previous studies [45,46] and can possibly be explained by the lower brake thermal efficiency of the engine, less completed combustion, and consequently elevated emission of organic compounds at the light-load in comparison with the high-load engine operating conditions. In contrast, samples collected for the engine fueled with B50 or B100, the mutagenic activity was observed for both light-load and heavy-load engine operating conditions. In our study, the increase in mutagenic activity correlated with the increased level of the fraction of organic carbon in these samples [23]. Samples with the higher fraction of organic carbon also exhibited the higher genotoxic activity for the strain TA98 without S9 microsomal activation. For example, DPM samples obtained for M1 and M2 operating conditions had respectively 64% and 168% higher organic carbon content when B100 was used in place of ULSD [23]. Consequently, the B100 samples exhibited 91% and 179% higher mutagenic activity than corresponding ULSD samples. The DPM generated at heavy-load engine operating condition (M4) that was characterized with the lowest fraction of organic carbon of all samples collected [23] showed no positive mutagenic activity. The mutagenic activity increased with fraction of biodiesel in the fuel for three modes (M1-M3). Similarly, the results produced by the other groups [30,31], indicate a strong dependency of the number of revertants on the engine speed. In our study, the strongest increases in mutagenicity were triggered by B100 at the high-speed modes M1 and M2. In agreement with other studies [17,25], carbon analysis of the primary filter showed positive correlation between fraction of organic carbon and fraction of biodiesel in the fuel [23].

It is well established that particulate matter produced by combustion of petroleum diesel and biodiesel are a complex mixture of different compounds [5,48]. Regardless of the reduction in the total mass of particulate matter, the soluble organic fraction of the emitted particles is commonly found at a higher level in the exhaust of diesel engines fueled with biodiesel. Many studies have found that soluble organic fraction (SOF) of DPM contains polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and nitro-PAH that are known to be genotoxic and probably are strong contributors to induce gene mutation in bacteria [9,49-52]. Some of the PAH measured in the DPM, like benzo(a)pyrene, fluoranthene or benzo(ghi)perylene (chemically reactive, non-volatile), emitted at the greater levels in the biodiesel than diesel exhaust [53]. These PAHs are known to be mutagenic and highly carcinogenic. The positive results without metabolic activation confirm that components like substituted PAH contribute significantly to mutagenic effects of DPM. This effect of direct acting mutagens is attributed to substituted PAH, such as nitro-PAH [5,54-56]. Nitro-PAH could be formed by a reaction with the NOx present in diesel engine emissions. These substances display a strong direct mutagenicity while there parent compounds exhibit no or less mutagenicity [5,8,57,58]. The combustion of biodiesel in a diesel engine usually increases the release of nitrogen oxides [59]. An increase in NO2 concentration in the B50 exhaust samples [23] corresponded with the higher mutagenicity observed for B50 samples as compared to ULSD. Furthermore, Biswas et al., (2009) showed correlations between oxidative potential and organic carbon from DPM [60]. In our study we have an increased percentage of the organic carbon fraction for biodiesel samples in comparison with diesel exhaust. Higher concentrations of organic compounds and transition metals (Co, Cu, Ni, Zn) in the biodiesel exhaust than in diesel exhaust [61] might contribute to the higher oxidative potential of biodiesel DPM and thus to its higher in vitro mutagenicity. While the chemical characterization of the fuel exhaust is not part of the current study, future work focusing on deciphering the detailed compositions of the organic extracts of biodiesel and diesel exhaust and its effect on relation to the mutagenic activity, is highly prompted.

Benefits of using a DOC to control toxicity of DPM generates at light–and heavy-load engine operating conditions were investigated in our study. When the DOC was used, a strong correlation between engine operating conditions and observed changes in mutagenic activity of DPM was detected. DOC significantly decreased the mutagenic activity of DPM by 69% in the case of B100 and light-load (M1) engine operating conditions. A decrease in mutagenicity was also observed when engine equipped with DOC was fueled with B50 and heavily loaded. The decrease in mutagenicity can be explained by the fact that DOC effectively removed hydrocarbons and the organic carbon fraction of DPM [23]. Mutagenicity was slightly increased by the B100 exhaust (120 mg/plate) at high load mode M2 with a great increase in NO2 concentration [23], which might be responsible for synthesizing even more genotoxic materials, nitro-PAH, under these conditions. Our results are similar to those from the different studies showing that changes depended mainly on engine load modes [34,62,63]. They suggested that high engine load increases NOx in the exhaust and NOx cannot effectively be reduced by a DOC, while high NOx levels lead to an increased formation of nPAH.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the neat and blended soy-based FAME biodiesel fuels demonstrated the potential to substantially reduce the mine air concentrations of elemental carbon (EC) and total DPM mass. However, the DPM generated by diesel engine fueled with neat or blended biodiesel was found to have higher mutagenic potency, as determined by Salmonella assays than DPM generated by the same engine fueled with ULSD. This increase in mutagenicity might be attributed to the higher presence of organic carbon in the biodiesel DPM. Since our results demonstrated that the evaluated DOC was effective in controlling OC level and mutagenic potential of DPM, we would recommend using optimized DOCs on the diesel engines particularly those fueled with biodiesel. Further research is needed to investigate the health effect of biodiesel exhaust as well as efficiency of the DOC and other exhaust aftertreatment devices in removal of specific potentially toxic species.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by NIOSH 2927ZKCY.

Footnotes

Author's contributions

ERK was interpreting the data and prepared the manuscript, XCS was completed the experiments and analyzed data, MJK was involved in experimental design and completing experiments, ABB was involved in experimental design of the study and collecting diesel/biodiesel exhaust particles, AAS was involved in coordinating the study, interpreting the data, and writing the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  • 1.Balat M, Balat H. Progress in biodiesel processing. Applied Energy. 2010;87:1815–1835. Article. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Krahl J, Seidel H, Bunger L. Exhaust gas emissions of rapeseed oil based fuels and effects on environment and human health. In: Chartier P, Ferrero GL, Henius UM, Hultberg S, Sachau J, Wiinblad M, editors. Proceedings of the 9th European bioenergy conference. Elsevier; Oxford: 1996. pp. 1657–1661. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Graboski MS, McCormick RL. Combustion of fat and vegetable oils derived fuels in diesel engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci. 1998;24:125–164. Article. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Bugarski AD, Janisko S, Cauda EG, Noll JD, Mischler SE. Controlling Exposure - Diesel Emissions in Underground Mines. Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration. 2012 ISBN-13: 9780873353601. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Bunger J, Krahl J, Schroder O, Schmidt L, Westphal GA. Potential hazards associated with combustion of bio-derived versus petroleum-derived diesel fuel. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2012;42:732–50. doi: 10.3109/10408444.2012.710194. Article | PubMed Abstract | PubMed Full Text. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Krahl J, Knothe GH, Munack A, Ruschel Y, Schroder O, et al. Comparison of Exhaust Emissions and Their Mutagenicity from the Combustion of Biodiesel, Vegetable Oil, Gas-to-Liquid and Petrodiesel Fuels. Fuel. 2009;88:1064–1069. Article. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Mermelstein R, Kiriazides DK, Butler M, McCoy EC, Rosenkranz HS. The extraordinary mutagenicity of nitropyrenes in bacteria. Mutat Res. 1981;89:187–96. doi: 10.1016/0165-1218(81)90236-6. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Ohe T. Mutagenicity of photochemical reaction products of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons with nitrite. Sci Total Environ. 1984;39:161–75. doi: 10.1016/0048-9697(84)90033-0. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Rivedal E, Myhre O, Sanner T, Eide I. Supplemental role of the Ames mutation assay and gap junction intercellular communication in studies of possible carcinogenic compounds from diesel exhaust particles. Arch Toxicol. 2003;77:533–42. doi: 10.1007/s00204-003-0483-6. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Silverman DT, Samanic CM, Lubin JH, Blair AE, Stewart PA, Vermeulen R, Coble JB, Rothman N, Schleiff PL, Travis WD, Ziegler RG, Wacholder S, Attfield MD. The Diesel Exhaust in Miners study: a nested case-control study of lung cancer and diesel exhaust. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104:855–68. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djs034. Article | PubMed Abstract | PubMed Full Text. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Attfield MD, Schleiff PL, Lubin JH, Blair A, Stewart PA, Vermeulen R, Coble JB, Silverman DT. The Diesel Exhaust in Miners study: a cohort mortality study with emphasis on lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104:869–83. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djs035. Article | PubMed Abstract | PubMed Full Text. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.IARC diesel engine exhaust carcinogenic. Cent Eur J Public Health. 2012;20:120–138. PubMed. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.EPA . Draft technical report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Washington, DC: 2012. A comprehensive analysis of biodiesel impact on exhaust emissions. EPA420-P-02-001. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Schultz MJ, Fields KG, Atchison DJ, Gerbec EJ, Haney RA, et al. Using bio-diesel fuels to reduce DPM concentrations; DPM results using various blends of bio-diesel fuel mixtures in a stone mine. In: Ganguli R, Bandopadhyay S, editors. Proceedings of the 10th U.S./North American Mine Ventilation Symposium. Balkema; Leiden, Netherlands: 2004. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tomko DM, Stackpole RP, Findlay CD, Pomroy WH. Metal/nonmetal diesel particulate matter rule. In: Hardcastle S, McKinnon DL, editors. Proceedings of the 13th U.S./North American Mine Ventilation Symposium. MIRARCO—Mining Innovation; Sudbury, ON, Canada: 2010. pp. 143–148. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Durbin DT, Cocker DR, III, Sawant AA, Johnson K, Miller JW, et al. Regulated emissions from biodiesel fuels from on/off-road applications. Atmos. Environ. 2007;41:5647–5658. Article. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.McDonald JF, Cantrell BK, Watts WF, Bickel KL. Evaluation of a soybean oil based diesel fuel in an underground gold mine. CIM Bulletin. 1997;91:91–95. Article. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.McCormick RL. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Golden CO: 2005. Effects of biodiesel on NOX emissions. Presented at Air Resources Board Biodiesel Workshop. Pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Watts WF, Spears M, Johnson J. Evaluation of biodiesel fuel and oxidation catalyst in an underground mine. Report to DEEP Technical Committee. 1998 [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Chen YC, Wu CH. Emissions of submicron particles from a direct injection diesel engine by using biodiesel. J Environ Sci Health A Tox Hazard Subst Environ Eng. 2002;37:829–43. doi: 10.1081/ese-120003591. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Bugarski AD, Schnakenberg GH, Noll JD, Mischler SE, Patts LD, et al. Report of Investigations 9667. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, DHHS (NIOSH); 2006. Effectiveness of selected diesel particulate matter control technologies for underground mining applications: Isolated zone study, 2003. Publication No. 2006-126. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Bugarski AD, Schnakenberg GH, Mischler SE, Noll JD, Patts LD, et al. Report of Investigations 9668. U.S. Department of Health And Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Pittsburgh Research Laboratory; Pittsburgh, PA: 2006. Effectiveness of selected diesel particulate matter control technologies for underground mining applications: isolated zone study. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Bugarski AD, Cauda EG, Janisko SJ, Hummer JA, Patts LD. Aerosols emitted in underground mine air by diesel engine fueled with biodiesel. J Air Waste Manag Assoc. 2010;60:237–44. doi: 10.3155/1047-3289.60.2.237. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Swanson KJ, Madden MC, Ghio AJ. Biodiesel exhaust: the need for health effects research. Environ Health Perspect. 2007;115:496–9. doi: 10.1289/ehp.9631. Article | PubMed Abstract | PubMed Full Text. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Purcell DJ, McClure BT, McDonald J, Basu HN. Transient testing of soy methyl ester fuels in an indirect injection, compression ignition engine. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 1996;73:381–388. Article. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Ames BN, Lee FD, Durston WE. An improved bacterial test system for the detection and classification of mutagens and carcinogens. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1973;70:782–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.70.3.782. Article | PubMed Abstract | PubMed Full Text. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Ames BN, McCann J, Yamasaki E. Methods for detecting carcinogens and mutagens with the Salmonella/mammalian-microsome mutagenicity test. Mutat Res. 1975;31:347–64. doi: 10.1016/0165-1161(75)90046-1. PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Carraro E, Locatelli AL, Ferrero C, Fea E, Gilli G. Biological activity of particle exhaust emissions from light-duty diesel engines. J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol. 1997;16:101–9. Article | PubMed. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Bagley ST, Gratz D. Evaluation of biodiesel fuel and a diesel oxidation catalyst in an underground metal mine, part 3 – biological and chemical characterization. Final Report. Submitted to the DEEP Technical Committee. 1998;32:1183–1191. Article. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Bunger J, Krahl J, Franke HU, Munack A, Hallier E. Mutagenic and cytotoxic effects of exhaust particulate matter of biodiesel compared to fossil diesel fuel. Mutat Res. 1998;415:13–23. doi: 10.1016/s1383-5718(98)00039-4. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Bunger J, Krahl J, Baum K, Schroder O, Muller M, Westphal G, Ruhnau P, Schulz TG, Hallier E. Cytotoxic and mutagenic effects, particle size and concentration analysis of diesel engine emissions using biodiesel and petrol diesel as fuel. Arch Toxicol. 2000;74:490–8. doi: 10.1007/s002040000155. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Bunger J, Muller MM, Krahl J, Baum K, Weigel A, Hallier E, Schulz TG. Mutagenicity of diesel exhaust particles from two fossil and two plant oil fuels. Mutagenesis. 2000;15:391–7. doi: 10.1093/mutage/15.5.391. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Bünger J, Krahl J, Stein H, Schröder O, Müller M, et al. Particle filters reduce emission and mutagenicity of diesel exhaust in regular operation but can cause an increase during the regeneration phase. Naunyn Schmiedeberg's Arch Pharmacol. 2004;369:145. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Bunger J, Krahl J, Weigel A, Schroder O, Bruning T, Muller M, Hallier E, Westphal G. Influence of fuel properties, nitrogen oxides, and exhaust treatment by an oxidation catalytic converter on the mutagenicity of diesel engine emissions. Arch Toxicol. 2006;80:540–6. doi: 10.1007/s00204-006-0088-y. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Bunger J, Krahl J, Munack A, Ruschel Y, Schroder O, Emmert B, Westphal G, Muller M, Hallier E, Bruning T. Strong mutagenic effects of diesel engine emissions using vegetable oil as fuel. Arch Toxicol. 2007;81:599–603. doi: 10.1007/s00204-007-0196-3. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Kado NY, Huang TL, Kuzmicky PA. Final Report, EDG–95–7561. Montana Department of Environmental Quality; Helena, Montana: 2001. Truck-in-the-Park II: Chemical and bioassay analyses of diesel and biodiesel particulate matter. Website. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Kado NY, Kuzmicky PA. Final Report. Report 3 in a series of 6. National Renewable Energy Laboratory U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Scientific and Technical Information; Oak Ridge, TN USA: 2003. Bioassay analyses of particulate matter from a diesel bus engine using various biodiesel feedstock fuels. Pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Krahl J, Munack A, Ruschel Y, Schröder O, Bünger J. Exhaust gas emissions and mutagenic effects of diesel fuel, biodiesel and biodiesel blends. SAE Technical Paper. 2008;2008:01–2508. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Turrio-Baldassarri L, Battistelli CL, Conti L, Crebelli R, De Berardis B, Iamiceli AL, Gambino M, Iannaccone S. Emission comparison of urban bus engine fueled with diesel oil and ‘biodiesel’ blend. Sci Total Environ. 2004;327:147–62. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2003.10.033. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Bugarski AD, Schnakenberg GH, Jr., Hummer IA, Cauda E, Janisko SI, Patts LD. Effects of diesel exhaust aftertreatment devices on concentrations and size distribution of aerosols in underground mine air. Environ Sci Technol. 2009;43:6737–43. doi: 10.1021/es9006355. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Administration) National diesel inventory. 2009 [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Maron DM, Ames BN. Revised methods for the Salmonella mutagenicity test. Mutat Res. 1983;113:173–215. doi: 10.1016/0165-1161(83)90010-9. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Liu YQ, Keane M, Ensell M, Miller W, Kashon M, Ong TM, Mauderly J, Lawson D, Gautam M, Zielinska B, Whitney K, Eberhardt J, Wallace W. In vitro genotoxicity of exhaust emissions of diesel and gasoline engine vehicles operated on a unified driving cycle. J Environ Monit. 2005;7:60–6. doi: 10.1039/b407375d. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.McMillian MH, Cui M, Gautam M, Keane M, Ong T, et al. Diesel engine loading, speed, and fuel affect bacterial gene mutation activity induced by solvent extract of exhaust particulate material. SAE Technical Paper. 2002 2002-01-1699. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Shi X-C, Keane MJ, Ong T-M, Harrison JC, Slaven JE, et al. Diesel exhaust particulate material expression of in vitro genetoxic activities when dispersed into a phospholipids component of lung surfactant. Journal of Physics. 2009 Conference Series 151 012021. | Article. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.McClellan RO, Hesterberg TW, Wall JC. Evaluation of carcinogenic hazard of diesel engine exhaust needs to consider revolutionary changes in diesel technology. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2012;63:225–58. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2012.04.005. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Lu T, Huang Z, Cheung CS, Ma J. Size distribution of EC, OC and particle-phase PAHs emissions from a diesel engine fueled with three fuels. Sci Total Environ. 2012;438:33–41. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.08.026. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Kittelson DB. Engines and nanoparticles: a review. J Aerosol Sci. 1998;29:575–588. Article. [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Zielinska B, Sagebiel J, McDonald JD, Whitney K, Lawson DR. Emission rates and comparative chemical composition from selected in-use diesel and gasoline-fueled vehicles. J Air Waste Manag Assoc. 2004;54:1138–50. doi: 10.1080/10473289.2004.10470973. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Moller M, Hagen I, Ramdahl T. Mutagenicity of polycyclic aromatic compounds (PAC) identified in source emissions and ambient air. Mutat Res. 1985;157:149–56. doi: 10.1016/0165-1218(85)90110-7. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Pederson TC, Siak JS. The role of nitroaromatic compounds in the direct-acting mutagenicity of diesel particle extracts. J Appl Toxicol. 1981;1:54–60. doi: 10.1002/jat.2550010203. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Schuetzle D. Sampling of vehicle emissions for chemical analysis and biological testing. Environ Health Perspect. 1983;47:65–80. doi: 10.1289/ehp.834765. PubMed Abstract | PubMed Full Text. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Kado NY, Okamoto RA, Kuzmicky PA. Chemical and bioassay analyses of diesel and biodiesel particulate matter: pilot study. Final report for The U.S. Department of Energy and The Renewable Energy Report Library. 1996 Pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Hayakawa K, Nakamura A, Terai N, Kizu R, Ando K. Nitroarene concentrations and direct-acting mutagenicity of diesel exhaust particulates fractionated by silica-gel column chromatography. Chem Pharm Bull (Tokyo) 1997;45:1820–2. doi: 10.1248/cpb.45.1820. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Westerholm R, Christensen A, Tornqvist M, Ehrenberg L, Rannug U, Sjogren M, Rafter J, Soontjens C, Almen J, Gragg K. Comparison of exhaust emissions from Swedish environmental classified diesel fuel (MK1) and European Program on Emissions, Fuels and Engine Technologies (EPEFE) reference fuel: a chemical and biological characterization, with viewpoints on cancer risk. Environ Sci Technol. 2001;35:1748–54. doi: 10.1021/es000113i. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Heeb NV, Schmid P, Kohler M, Gujer E, Zennegg M, Wenger D, Wichser A, Ulrich A, Gfeller U, Honegger P, Zeyer K, Emmenegger L, Petermann JL, Czerwinski J, Mosimann T, Kasper M, Mayer A. Secondary effects of catalytic diesel particulate filters: conversion of PAHs versus formation of nitro-PAHs. Environ Sci Technol. 2008;42:3773–9. doi: 10.1021/es7026949. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.HEI. Health Effects Institute . A special report of the institute's diesel working group. Cambridge; USA: 1995. Diesel exhaust: A critical analysis of emissions, exposure, and health effects. Website. [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Victorin K. Review of the genotoxicity of nitrogen oxides. Mutat Res. 1994;317:43–55. doi: 10.1016/0165-1110(94)90011-6. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Mauderly JL. Health issues concerning inhalation of petroleum diesel and biodiesel exhaust. In: Martini N, Schell J, editors. Plant Oils as Fuels: Present State of Science and Future Developments. Springer; Berlin: 1997. pp. 92–103. [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Biswas S, Verma V, Schauer JJ, Cassee FR, Cho AK, Sioutas C. Oxidative potential of semi-volatile and non volatile particulate matter (PM) from heavy-duty vehicles retrofitted with emission control technologies. Environ Sci Technol. 2009;43:3905–12. doi: 10.1021/es9000592. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Jalava PI, Tapanainen M, Kuuspalo K, Markkanen A, Hakulinen P, Happo MS, Pennanen AS, Ihalainen M, Yli-Pirila P, Makkonen U, Teinila K, Maki-Paakkanen J, Salonen RO, Jokiniemi J, Hirvonen MR. Toxicological effects of emission particles from fossil- and biodiesel-fueled diesel engine with and without DOC/POC catalytic converter. Inhal Toxicol. 2010;22(Suppl 2):48–58. doi: 10.3109/08958378.2010.519009. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Tanaka Y, Hihara T, Nagata M, Azuma N, Ueno A. Modeling of diesel oxidation catalyst. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2005;44:8205–8212. Article. [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Westphal GA, Krahl J, Munack A, Ruschel Y, Schroder O, Hallier E, Bruning T, Bunger J. Mutagenicity of diesel engine exhaust is eliminated in the gas phase by an oxidation catalyst but only slightly reduced in the particle phase. Environ Sci Technol. 2012;46:6417–24. doi: 10.1021/es300399e. Article | PubMed. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES