Corrigendum to “PM2.5 Emissions from Hand-Held Sparklers: Chemical Characterization and Health Risk Assessment” [Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 14: 1477−1486]

Received: July 24, 2013
Revised: September 26, 2013
Accepted: January 1, 2018
Download Citation: RIS|BibTeX|https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2018.01.1801  

Original Article
Raghu Betha, Rajasekhar Balasubramanian
PM_2.5 Emissions from Hand-Held Sparklers: Chemical Characterization and Health Risk Assessment
Volume: 14 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 1477-1486 
 

Cite this article:

Betha, R. and Balasubramanian, R. (2018). Corrigendum to “PM2.5 Emissions from Hand-Held Sparklers: Chemical Characterization and Health Risk Assessment” [Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 14: 1477−1486]. Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 18: 560-563. https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2018.01.1801

HIGHLIGHTS

The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused.

ABSTRACT

The authors regret that inadvertent errors occurred in the estimation of excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) in the abovereferenced paper due to an oversight. Specifically, the slope factor of nickel (Ni) we used in the ELCR calculation should have been 8.4 × 10^–1 (mg/kg/day)^–1 instead of 8.4 × 101 (mg/kg/day)^–1. Further, to be consistent with other publications where we assumed the measured chromium (Cr) to exist entirely as hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) in airborne particulate matter, we revised the slope factor of Cr to the USEPA recommended value of 42 and recalculated the ELCR accordingly. These revised slope factors do not affect, or influence our overall qualitative conclusion made earlier in the published paper in that whistling sparklers have higher carcinogenic risk compared to low smoke and colored sparklers. The revised ELCR estimates are given below in Tables 2, 3 and 4.

Keywords: Chemical Characterization and Health Risk Assessment