Journal & Issues

Volume 32 (2023): Issue 1 (March 2023)

Volume 31 (2022): Issue 3 (November 2022)

Volume 31 (2022): Issue 2 (July 2022)

Volume 31 (2022): Issue 1 (March 2022)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 4 (November 2021)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 3 (July 2021)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 2 (May 2021)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 1 (March 2021)

Volume 29 (2020): Issue 3 (December 2020)

Volume 29 (2020): Issue 2 (August 2020)

Volume 29 (2020): Issue 1 (April 2020)

Volume 28 (2019): Issue 7 (December 2019)

Volume 28 (2019): Issue 6 (August 2019)

Volume 28 (2019): Issue 5 (May 2019)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 4 (December 2018)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 3 (October 2018)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 2 (August 2018)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 1 (April 2018)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 8 (December 2017)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 7 (September 2017)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 6 (April 2017)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 5 (January 2017)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 4 (October 2016)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 3 (July 2016)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 2 (April 2016)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 1 (January 2016)

Volume 26 (2015): Issue 7 (September 2015)

Volume 26 (2015): Issue 6 (June 2015)

Volume 26 (2015): Issue 5 (March 2015)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 4 (December 2014)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 3 (September 2014)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 2 (July 2014)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 1 (April 2014)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 8 (December 2013)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 7 (September 2013)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 6 (June 2013)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 5 (March 2013)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 4 (December 2012)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 3 (August 2012)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 2 (June 2012)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 1 (February 2012)

Volume 24 (2011): Issue 6 (November 2011)

Volume 24 (2011): Issue 5 (May 2011)

Volume 24 (2011): Issue 4 (January 2011)

Volume 24 (2010): Issue 3 (November 2010)

Volume 24 (2010): Issue 2 (July 2010)

Volume 24 (2010): Issue 1 (April 2010)

Volume 23 (2009): Issue 6 (December 2009)

Volume 23 (2009): Issue 5 (September 2009)

Volume 23 (2009): Issue 4 (May 2009)

Volume 23 (2008): Issue 3 (December 2008)

Volume 23 (2008): Issue 2 (August 2008)

Volume 23 (2008): Issue 1 (April 2008)

Volume 22 (2007): Issue 5 (June 2007)

Volume 22 (2007): Issue 4 (January 2007)

Volume 22 (2006): Issue 3 (October 2006)

Volume 22 (2006): Issue 2 (July 2006)

Volume 22 (2006): Issue 1 (April 2006)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 8 (December 2005)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 7 (October 2005)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 6 (July 2005)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 5 (April 2005)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 4 (December 2004)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 3 (October 2004)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 2 (July 2004)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 1 (March 2004)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 8 (December 2003)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 7 (November 2003)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 6 (July 2003)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 5 (March 2003)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 4 (December 2002)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 3 (August 2002)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 2 (June 2002)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 1 (February 2002)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 7 (October 2001)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 6 (July 2001)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 5 (April 2001)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 4 (January 2001)

Volume 19 (2000): Issue 3 (October 2000)

Volume 19 (2000): Issue 2 (July 2000)

Volume 19 (2000): Issue 1 (April 2000)

Volume 18 (1999): Issue 6 (December 1999)

Volume 18 (1999): Issue 5 (July 1999)

Volume 18 (1999): Issue 4 (April 1999)

Volume 18 (1998): Issue 3 (December 1998)

Volume 18 (1998): Issue 2 (August 1998)

Volume 18 (1998): Issue 1 (April 1998)

Volume 17 (1997): Issue 3 (December 1997)

Volume 17 (1997): Issue 2 (September 1997)

Volume 17 (1996): Issue 1 (December 1996)

Volume 16 (1995): Issue 4 (November 1995)

Volume 16 (1995): Issue 3 (July 1995)

Volume 16 (1994): Issue 2 (June 1994)

Volume 16 (1994): Issue 1 (May 1994)

Volume 15 (1992): Issue 3 (November 1992)

Volume 15 (1992): Issue 2 (April 1992)

Volume 15 (1991): Issue 1 (August 1991)

Volume 14 (1990): Issue 6 (June 1990)

Volume 14 (1989): Issue 5 (October 1989)

Volume 14 (1989): Issue 4 (February 1989)

Volume 14 (1989): Issue 3 (January 1989)

Volume 14 (1988): Issue 2 (October 1988)

Volume 14 (1987): Issue 1 (December 1987)

Volume 13 (1986): Issue 5 (December 1986)

Volume 13 (1986): Issue 4 (August 1986)

Volume 13 (1986): Issue 3 (July 1986)

Volume 13 (1985): Issue 2 (December 1985)

Volume 13 (1985): Issue 1 (January 1985)

Volume 12 (1984): Issue 5 (November 1984)

Volume 12 (1984): Issue 4 (July 1984)

Volume 12 (1984): Issue 3 (February 1984)

Volume 12 (1983): Issue 2 (June 1983)

Volume 12 (1983): Issue 1 (February 1983)

Volume 11 (1982): Issue 5 (November 1982)

Volume 11 (1982): Issue 4 (August 1982)

Volume 11 (1982): Issue 3 (January 1982)

Volume 11 (1981): Issue 2 (September 1981)

Volume 11 (1981): Issue 1 (March 1981)

Volume 10 (1980): Issue 3 (October 1980)

Volume 10 (1980): Issue 2 (July 1980)

Volume 10 (1979): Issue 1 (December 1979)

Volume 9 (1978): Issue 5 (December 1978)

Volume 9 (1978): Issue 4 (July 1978)

Volume 9 (1977): Issue 3 (October 1977)

Volume 9 (1977): Issue 2 (June 1977)

Volume 9 (1977): Issue 1 (April 1977)

Volume 8 (1976): Issue 7 (October 1976)

Volume 8 (1976): Issue 6 (June 1976)

Volume 8 (1976): Issue 5 (March 1976)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 4 (December 1975)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 3 (August 1975)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 2 (May 1975)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 1 (January 1975)

Volume 7 (1974): Issue 5 (September 1974)

Volume 7 (1974): Issue 4 (April 1974)

Volume 7 (1973): Issue 3 (November 1973)

Volume 7 (1973): Issue 2 (June 1973)

Volume 7 (1973): Issue 1 (January 1973)

Volume 6 (1972): Issue 5 (October 1972)

Volume 6 (1972): Issue 4 (August 1972)

Volume 6 (1972): Issue 3 (March 1972)

Volume 6 (1971): Issue 2 (September 1971)

Volume 6 (1971): Issue 1 (July 1971)

Volume 5 (1970): Issue 6 (December 1970)

Volume 5 (1970): Issue 5 (November 1970)

Volume 5 (1970): Issue 4 (August 1970)

Volume 5 (1969): Issue 3 (December 1969)

Volume 5 (1969): Issue 2 (August 1969)

Volume 5 (1969): Issue 1 (June 1969)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 7 (December 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 6 (November 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 5 (July 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 4 (May 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 3 (February 1968)

Volume 4 (1967): Issue 2 (October 1967)

Volume 4 (1967): Issue 1 (August 1967)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 9 (December 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 8 (December 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 7 (November 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 6 (September 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 5 (May 1966)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 4 (October 1965)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 3 (August 1965)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 2 (May 1965)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 1 (April 1965)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 7 (November 1964)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 6 (October 1964)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 5 (May 1964)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 4 (February 1964)

Volume 2 (1963): Issue 3 (October 1963)

Volume 2 (1963): Issue 2 (June 1963)

Volume 2 (1963): Issue 1 (March 1963)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 10 (December 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 9 (December 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 8 (November 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 7 (November 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 6 (July 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 5 (February 1962)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 4 (November 1961)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 3 (August 1961)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 2 (May 1961)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 1 (January 1961)

Journal Details
Format
Journal
eISSN
2719-9509
First Published
01 Jan 1992
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English

Search

Volume 29 (2020): Issue 3 (December 2020)

Journal Details
Format
Journal
eISSN
2719-9509
First Published
01 Jan 1992
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English

Search

4 Articles
Open Access

Inter-Laboratory Reproducibility and Interchangeability of 3R4F and 1R6F Reference Cigarettes in Mainstream Smoke Chemical Analysis and In Vitro Toxicity Assays

Published Online: 31 Dec 2020
Page range: 119 - 135

Abstract

Summary

A new reference cigarette, 1R6F, produced by the Kentucky Tobacco Research and Development Center, has been manufactured as a substitute for the 3R4F reference cigarette because of a depletion of 3R4F stock. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the interchangeability of 1R6F and 3R4F by comparing the chemical and biological characteristics of the mainstream smoke and to assess the inter-laboratory reproducibility by comparing the results obtained in the current study with a previous report. We analyzed 45 priority chemicals required by Health Canada for regulatory reporting and assessed the toxicological effects of cigarette smoke using in vitro standard toxicological assays recommended by the Cooperation Centre for Scientific Research Relative to Tobacco (CORESTA) under the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard and intense smoking regimens. The results of the chemical analysis and standard toxicological assays showed a good inter-laboratory reproducibility for 1R6F as a reference cigarette, while there were some slight reproducible differences between 1R6F and 3R4F. In addition, we investigated the interchangeability of 1R6F with 3R4F in some additional toxicological assays that detect oxidative stress because oxidative stress is a principle endpoint used in tobacco research with next generation tobacco and nicotine delivery products (NGPs). Both 1R6F and 3R4F elicited comparable responses in the oxidative stress assays. Overall, our results showed inter-laboratory reproducibility in chemical and standard toxicological assessments of 1R6F; thus, suggesting the suitability of 1R6F as a reference cigarette. In addition, the results obtained in the oxidative stress assays provide insight into the interchangeability of 1R6F with 3R4F when used as a comparator for NGPs.

Keywords

  • Mainstream cigarette smoke
  • inter-laboratory reproducibility
  • chemical analysis
  • toxicity
Open Access

Relationship Between Nicotine Dependence Scores and Nicotine, Cotinine, 3′-Hydroxycotinine and Nicotine Metabolite Ratio in Chinese Male Smokers

Published Online: 31 Dec 2020
Page range: 136 - 144

Abstract

Summary

Smoking is mainly sustained by nicotine dependence (ND), which varies across ethnic groups principally due to genetic as well as environmental factors. The Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) and biomarkers of tobacco exposure are two important approaches to assess ND. However, the relationship between ND and FTND of Chinese smokers has not been studied. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between FTND scores and nicotine, cotinine, 3′-hydroxycotinine (3HC) and nicotine metabolite ratio (NMR, the concentration ratio of 3HC to cotinine) in Chinese smokers. FTND was carried out and general characteristics were collected using a self-administered smoking questionnaire with 289 smokers. Nicotine, cotinine and 3HC in urine were simultaneously determined by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The concentrations of nicotine, cotinine and 3HC in the urine of smokers with a high FTND score were higher than in the urine of those with a low FTND score. There were significant correlations between urinary biomarker and FTND scores. Except for FTND item 2 (difficulty to refrain), the other items showed significant associations with the urinary biomarkers. No relationship was found between the nicotine metabolite ratio (NMR, 3′-hydroxycotinine/cotinine) and FTND scores or general characteristics of the participants. In conclusion, biomarkers of tobacco exposure levels are significantly associated with FTND scores. However, FTND Item 2 and NMR were not found to be associated with nicotine dependence in Chinese smokers.

Keywords

  • Nicotine
  • cotinine
  • 3′-hydroxycotinine
  • nicotine-metabolite ratio
  • nicotine dependence
Open Access

Simulation of Heat and Mass Transfer of Cut Tobacco in a Batch Rotary Dryer by Multi-Objective Optimization

Published Online: 31 Dec 2020
Page range: 145 - 155

Abstract

Summary

To simulate the drying process of cut tobacco in a batch rotary dryer, six different models of equilibrium moisture content were selected to calculate the driving force of mass transfer, and a mathematical model of heat and mass transfer was numerically solved. The multi-objective nonlinear problem of heat and mass transfer coefficients was optimized by employing a weight factor. The simulation results showed that the weight factor r was an important parameter for fitting results of moisture content and temperature. The model evaluation indices almost reached their minimal values with r at 0.1. For all the six equilibrium/classic models the fit was better for moisture content than for temperature. One model (M-Hen/C) was superior to other equilibrium/classic models and the REA (reaction engineering approach) model. This study aims for an understanding of heat and mass transfer in the tobacco drying process, and provides a theoretical framework to support the prediction of temperature and moisture in various drying situations.

Keywords

  • Cut tobacco
  • drying
  • heat and mass transfer
  • equilibrium moisture content
  • multi-objective optimization
Open Access

Numerical Simulation of the Burning Process in a King-Size Cigarette Based on Experimentally Derived Reaction Kinetics

Published Online: 31 Dec 2020
Page range: 156 - 179

Abstract

Summary

A comprehensive two-dimensional (2D) mathematical model has been proposed to simulate the burning process of a king-size cigarette. The characteristics of this model are including: 1) the use of kinetic models for the evaporation of water, the pyrolysis of tobacco and the oxidation of char, 2) the application of mathematical relationships between the release amounts of certain products (i.e., “tar” and CO) and different reaction variables (i.e., temperatures and oxygen concentrations), 3) the introduction of mass, heat and momentum transports, 4) the consideration of filtration effects of the cigarette filter on “tar”. These characteristics were expressed in a set of coupled equations that can be solved numerically by FLUENT. The information about the char density field, temperature field, flow velocity field, “tar” and CO density fields and the filtration efficiency could be obtained from the model. This model was validated by comparing the predictions with experimental data on puff number, the temperatures at specific locations, the filtration efficiency and the yields of “tar” and CO under different puff intensities. The calculated results show a good agreement with the experimental data. The predicted puff number was 7.3, and the experimental puff number was 6.8. The standard root mean square error (NRMSE) between the experimental and the predicted temperatures at specific locations is < 18%. The predicted filtration efficiency for “tar” was 46.1%, and the experimentally determined filtration efficiency for nicotine was 44.5%. The maximum relative deviations of the yields of “tar” and CO under different puff intensities were 8.9% and 10.6%, respectively.

Keywords

  • Numerical simulation
  • cigarette burning process
  • pyrolysis
  • combustion
  • “tar” and CO release
  • filtration efficiency
4 Articles
Open Access

Inter-Laboratory Reproducibility and Interchangeability of 3R4F and 1R6F Reference Cigarettes in Mainstream Smoke Chemical Analysis and In Vitro Toxicity Assays

Published Online: 31 Dec 2020
Page range: 119 - 135

Abstract

Summary

A new reference cigarette, 1R6F, produced by the Kentucky Tobacco Research and Development Center, has been manufactured as a substitute for the 3R4F reference cigarette because of a depletion of 3R4F stock. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the interchangeability of 1R6F and 3R4F by comparing the chemical and biological characteristics of the mainstream smoke and to assess the inter-laboratory reproducibility by comparing the results obtained in the current study with a previous report. We analyzed 45 priority chemicals required by Health Canada for regulatory reporting and assessed the toxicological effects of cigarette smoke using in vitro standard toxicological assays recommended by the Cooperation Centre for Scientific Research Relative to Tobacco (CORESTA) under the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard and intense smoking regimens. The results of the chemical analysis and standard toxicological assays showed a good inter-laboratory reproducibility for 1R6F as a reference cigarette, while there were some slight reproducible differences between 1R6F and 3R4F. In addition, we investigated the interchangeability of 1R6F with 3R4F in some additional toxicological assays that detect oxidative stress because oxidative stress is a principle endpoint used in tobacco research with next generation tobacco and nicotine delivery products (NGPs). Both 1R6F and 3R4F elicited comparable responses in the oxidative stress assays. Overall, our results showed inter-laboratory reproducibility in chemical and standard toxicological assessments of 1R6F; thus, suggesting the suitability of 1R6F as a reference cigarette. In addition, the results obtained in the oxidative stress assays provide insight into the interchangeability of 1R6F with 3R4F when used as a comparator for NGPs.

Keywords

  • Mainstream cigarette smoke
  • inter-laboratory reproducibility
  • chemical analysis
  • toxicity
Open Access

Relationship Between Nicotine Dependence Scores and Nicotine, Cotinine, 3′-Hydroxycotinine and Nicotine Metabolite Ratio in Chinese Male Smokers

Published Online: 31 Dec 2020
Page range: 136 - 144

Abstract

Summary

Smoking is mainly sustained by nicotine dependence (ND), which varies across ethnic groups principally due to genetic as well as environmental factors. The Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) and biomarkers of tobacco exposure are two important approaches to assess ND. However, the relationship between ND and FTND of Chinese smokers has not been studied. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between FTND scores and nicotine, cotinine, 3′-hydroxycotinine (3HC) and nicotine metabolite ratio (NMR, the concentration ratio of 3HC to cotinine) in Chinese smokers. FTND was carried out and general characteristics were collected using a self-administered smoking questionnaire with 289 smokers. Nicotine, cotinine and 3HC in urine were simultaneously determined by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The concentrations of nicotine, cotinine and 3HC in the urine of smokers with a high FTND score were higher than in the urine of those with a low FTND score. There were significant correlations between urinary biomarker and FTND scores. Except for FTND item 2 (difficulty to refrain), the other items showed significant associations with the urinary biomarkers. No relationship was found between the nicotine metabolite ratio (NMR, 3′-hydroxycotinine/cotinine) and FTND scores or general characteristics of the participants. In conclusion, biomarkers of tobacco exposure levels are significantly associated with FTND scores. However, FTND Item 2 and NMR were not found to be associated with nicotine dependence in Chinese smokers.

Keywords

  • Nicotine
  • cotinine
  • 3′-hydroxycotinine
  • nicotine-metabolite ratio
  • nicotine dependence
Open Access

Simulation of Heat and Mass Transfer of Cut Tobacco in a Batch Rotary Dryer by Multi-Objective Optimization

Published Online: 31 Dec 2020
Page range: 145 - 155

Abstract

Summary

To simulate the drying process of cut tobacco in a batch rotary dryer, six different models of equilibrium moisture content were selected to calculate the driving force of mass transfer, and a mathematical model of heat and mass transfer was numerically solved. The multi-objective nonlinear problem of heat and mass transfer coefficients was optimized by employing a weight factor. The simulation results showed that the weight factor r was an important parameter for fitting results of moisture content and temperature. The model evaluation indices almost reached their minimal values with r at 0.1. For all the six equilibrium/classic models the fit was better for moisture content than for temperature. One model (M-Hen/C) was superior to other equilibrium/classic models and the REA (reaction engineering approach) model. This study aims for an understanding of heat and mass transfer in the tobacco drying process, and provides a theoretical framework to support the prediction of temperature and moisture in various drying situations.

Keywords

  • Cut tobacco
  • drying
  • heat and mass transfer
  • equilibrium moisture content
  • multi-objective optimization
Open Access

Numerical Simulation of the Burning Process in a King-Size Cigarette Based on Experimentally Derived Reaction Kinetics

Published Online: 31 Dec 2020
Page range: 156 - 179

Abstract

Summary

A comprehensive two-dimensional (2D) mathematical model has been proposed to simulate the burning process of a king-size cigarette. The characteristics of this model are including: 1) the use of kinetic models for the evaporation of water, the pyrolysis of tobacco and the oxidation of char, 2) the application of mathematical relationships between the release amounts of certain products (i.e., “tar” and CO) and different reaction variables (i.e., temperatures and oxygen concentrations), 3) the introduction of mass, heat and momentum transports, 4) the consideration of filtration effects of the cigarette filter on “tar”. These characteristics were expressed in a set of coupled equations that can be solved numerically by FLUENT. The information about the char density field, temperature field, flow velocity field, “tar” and CO density fields and the filtration efficiency could be obtained from the model. This model was validated by comparing the predictions with experimental data on puff number, the temperatures at specific locations, the filtration efficiency and the yields of “tar” and CO under different puff intensities. The calculated results show a good agreement with the experimental data. The predicted puff number was 7.3, and the experimental puff number was 6.8. The standard root mean square error (NRMSE) between the experimental and the predicted temperatures at specific locations is < 18%. The predicted filtration efficiency for “tar” was 46.1%, and the experimentally determined filtration efficiency for nicotine was 44.5%. The maximum relative deviations of the yields of “tar” and CO under different puff intensities were 8.9% and 10.6%, respectively.

Keywords

  • Numerical simulation
  • cigarette burning process
  • pyrolysis
  • combustion
  • “tar” and CO release
  • filtration efficiency

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo