我国南方某核厂址蟾蜍剂量率评估的比较研究

Abstract

Abstract: Asiatic toad (Bufo gargarizans) was chosen as the referencing of amphibian at a nuclear site in southern China. The biological anatomy dosimetric model and environmental geometries were established. Using Monte-Carlo simulation techniques, the dose rates of target tissues/organs from media about ¹³⁷Cs, ⁹⁰Sr and ²³⁹Pu were calculated, thereby the dose rates of the whole toad body were calculated. The paper used ERICA tool and RESRAD-BIOTA code to calculate the dose rates of toad, comparing with the anatomical model. The results indicated that dose rates for internal exposure compare well among three approaches. For external exposure, differing environmental geometries assumption, the results of external dose rates were different. The anatomical model concerned with radionuclide distribution in individual tissue/organ is of great importance in investigating the biological individuals that of heterogeneous distribution of radionuclides.

Key words: toad, anatomical model, ERICA tool, RESRAD-BIOTA code

CLC Number:

R144.1

Han Baohua, Li Jianguo, Huang Peng, Han Xuelei, Gao Yan, Ma Binghui, Shang Honglian, Wang Huijuan. Comparative assessment of dose rate for toad at a nuclear site in southern China[J].RADIATION PROTECTION, 2016, 36(1): 14-21.

References

[1] ICRP. The 2007 recommendation of the international commission on radiological commission on radiological protection[R]. ICRP Publication 103. 2007.
[2] ICRP. Environmental protection: the concept and use of reference animals and plants[R]. ICRP Publication 108. 2008.
[3] Yankovich TL, Vivesi Batlle J, Vives-Lynch S, et al. An international model validation exercise on radionuclide transfer and doses to freshwater biota[J]. Journal of Radiological Protection, 2010, 30 :299-340.
[4] Beresford NA, Barnett CL, Brown JE, et al. Predicting the radiation exposure of terrestrial wildlife in the Chernobyl exclusion zone: an international comparison of approaches[J]. Journal of Radiological Protection, 2010, 30:341-373.
[5] Carl-Magnus Larsson. An overview of the ERICA Integrated Approach to the assessment and management of environmental risks from ionising contaminants[J]. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 2008, 99 :1 364-1 370.
[6] USDOE. Technical Standard DOE-STD-1153—2002 Graded approach for evaluating radiation doses to aquatic and terrestrial biota[S]. Washington DC, USA, 2002.
[7] International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements(ICRU). Photon, electron, proton, and neutron interaction data for body tissues[R]. ICRU Report 46. Bethesda, MD:ICRU,1992.
[8] ICRP. Radionuclide transformations-energy and intensity of emissions[R].ICRP Publication 38. 1983.
[9] Blaylock BG, Frank ML, O’Neal BR. Methodology for estimating radiation dose rates to freshwater biota exposed to radionuclides in the environment[R]. US Department of Energy,1993.
[10] IAEA. Environmental Modeling for RAdiation Safety (EMRAS) programe, Modelling the transfer of radionuclides to non-human biological species[R]. DRAFT Biota Working Group Report, 2008.
[11] Brown JE, Alfonso B, Avila R, et al. The ERICA Tool[J]. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 2008, 99:1 371-1 383.
[12] Beresford NA, Gaschak S, Barnett CL, et al. Estimating the exposure of small mammals at three sites within the Chernobyl exclusion zone——A test application of the ERICA Tool[J]. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 2008, 99:1 496-1 502.
[13] Morris RC. Applying DOE’s Graded Approach for assessing radiation impacts to non-human biota at the INL[J]. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 2006, 87:77-100.
[14] Kathryn A, Higley, Stephen L, et al. Derivation of a screening methodology for evaluating radiation dose to aquatic and terrestrial biota[J]. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 2003, 66: 41-59.

[1]	CHEN Qianlan, LUO Zhiping, LIU Senlin. The comparison and analysis of excretion fraction after inhalation of ²⁴¹Am based on ICRP No.141 biokinetic model [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2021, 41(3): 193-200.
[2]	CHEN Qianlan, LUO Zhiping, LIU Senlin. The calculation of the content per intake of ²⁴¹Am based on ICRPPublication No. 141 and comparison of the new and old models’ results [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2021, 41(1): 17-26.
[3]	WANG Liang, PENG Yong, LIU Yi, PENG Hongfen. Research on hospital-level CT radiation dose and diagnostic dose level [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2019, 39(6): 517-521.
[4]	WANG Liang, PENG Yong, LIU Yi, PENG Hongfen. Research on hospital-level CT radiation dose and diagnostic dose level [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2019, 39(6): 517-521.
[5]	YANG Suyun, HU Tingting, WANG Hongli, SHI Xiaoli,LIU Lina, TANG Guohua, CHI Cuiping. Preliminary dose estimation for medical staff during the emergencytreatment of patients with recurrent papillary thyroid cancer treatedwith radioiodine (¹³¹I) radiotherapy [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2019, 39(3): 228-233.
[6]	Li Yang, Li Jianguo, Wang Aijun. Hybrid phantom of mussel for calculation of dose conversion coefficients [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(6): 465-471.
[7]	Tang Shaohua, Lv Weifeng, Liu Jie, Xiong Jun, Huang Qianqian. Development and application of 3D dose rate field evaluation system [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(5): 347-354.
[8]	Hou Jie, Li Hang, Shen Fu, Chen Xiaoqiu. Measurement of aerosol particle size distribution in gaseous effluents of Qinshan nuclear power plant [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(4): 249-253.
[9]	Tao Naigui, Liu Zhanyang, Tao Yunliang. Study on infant ingestion dose caused by radioactive effluents from the normal operation of nuclear power plant [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(4): 274-279.
[10]	Li Hua, Zhao Yuan, Liu Liye, Xiao Yunshi, Li Junli. Research on gamma ray buildup factor for energy absorption based on MCNP [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(3): 161-168.
[11]	Cao Lei, Deng Jun, Lan Changlin, Song Yanchao, Ding Xiaowen, Ma Chi, Guo Zeqin, Zheng Yun, Qiu Yutong. Study on dosimetric method of low energy neutron with CR39 solid state nuclear track detector [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(3): 174-179.
[12]	Gao Fei, Xiao Xuefu, Ni Ning, Hou Jinbing, Song Mingzhe. Development of energy compensated high pressure ionization chamber as standard dosimeter for metrological verification [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(2): 87-93.
[13]	Liu Xiao, Zeng Yongming, Yu Rengqiang, Wang Jie, Sun Jingkun. Estimation and validation of radiation dose to patients subjected to high-pitch and standard-pitch CCTA using Monte Carlo software [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(2): 131-137.
[14]	Liang Baohui, Chen Zhi, Xu Xie. Progress of patient size-specific dose estimation in CT examinations [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(2): 153-160.
[15]	Zheng Fang, Chen Zhi, Xu Xie. Influence of inclined angle embedded pipe in shielding wall on radiation protection performance for electron irradiation accelerator [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(1): 27-33.

Comparative assessment of dose rate for toad at a nuclear site in southern China

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0