Literature DB >> 21359297

Correlation of six anthropogenic markers in wastewater, surface water, bank filtrate, and soil aquifer treatment.

Marco Scheurer1, Florian Rüdiger Storck, Carola Graf, Heinz-Jürgen Brauch, Wolfgang Ruck, Ovadia Lev, Frank Thomas Lange.   

Abstract

Six trace contaminants (acesulfame (ACE), sucralose (SUC), carbamazepine (CBZ), diatrizoic acid (DTA), 1H-benzotriazole (BTZ) and its 4-methyl analogue (4-TTri)) were traced from wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) to receiving waters and further to riverbank filtration (RBF) wells to evaluate their prediction power as potential wastewater markers. Furthermore, the persistence of some compounds was investigated in advanced wastewater treatment by soil aquifer treatment (SAT). During wastewater treatment in four conventional activated sludge WWTPs ACE, SUC, and CBZ showed a pronounced stability expressed by stable concentration ratios in influent (in) and effluent (out) (ACE/CBZ: in45, out40; SUC/CBZ: in1.8, out1.7; and ACE/SUC: in24, out24). In a fifth WWTP, additional treatment with powdered activated carbon led to a strong elimination of CBZ, BTZ, and 4-TTri of about 80% and consequently to a distinctive shift of their ratios with unaffected compounds. Data from a seven month monitoring program at seven sampling locations at the rivers Rhine and Main in Germany revealed the best concentration correlation for ACE and CBZ (r(2) = 0.94) and also a good correlation of ACE and CBZ concentrations to BTZ and 4-TTri levels (r(2) = 0.66 to 0.82). The comparison of ratios at different sampling sites allowed for the identification of a CBZ point source. Furthermore, in Switzerland a higher consumption of SUC compared to Germany can be assumed, as a steadily increasing ACE/SUC ratio along the river Rhine was observed. In RBF wells a good correlation (r(2) = 0.85) was again observed for ACE and CBZ. Both also showed the highest stability at a prolonged residence time in the subsurface of a SAT field. In the most peripheral wells ACE and CBZ were still detected with mean values higher than 36 µg L(-1) and 1.3 µg L(-1), respectively. Although SUC concentrations in wastewater used for SAT decreased by more than 80% from about 18 µg L(-1) to 2.1 µg L(-1) and 3.5 µg L(-1) in these outlying wells, the compound was still adequate to indicate a wastewater impact in a qualitative way.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21359297     DOI: 10.1039/c0em00701c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Environ Monit        ISSN: 1464-0325


  9 in total

1.  The use of multiple tracers for tracking wastewater discharges in freshwater systems.

Authors:  Mike Williams; Anupama Kumar; Christoph Ort; Michael G Lawrence; Adam Hambly; Stuart J Khan; Rai Kookana
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2013-06-01       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  Environmental exposure of anthropogenic micropollutants in the Prut River at the Romanian-Moldavian border: a snapshot in the lower Danube river basin.

Authors:  Zaharie Moldovan; Olivian Marincas; Igor Povar; Tudor Lupascu; Philipp Longree; Jelena Simovic Rota; Heinz Singer; Alfredo C Alder
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Presence of microbial and chemical source tracking markers in roof-harvested rainwater and catchment systems for the detection of fecal contamination.

Authors:  M Waso; T Ndlovu; P H Dobrowsky; S Khan; W Khan
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2016-05-20       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Occurrence and suitability of pharmaceuticals and personal care products as molecular markers for raw wastewater contamination in surface water and groundwater.

Authors:  Ngoc Han Tran; Jinhua Li; Jiangyong Hu; Say Leong Ong
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 4.223

5.  Comprehensive micropollutant screening using LC-HRMS/MS at three riverbank filtration sites to assess natural attenuation and potential implications for human health.

Authors:  Juliane Hollender; Judith Rothardt; Dirk Radny; Martin Loos; Jannis Epting; Peter Huggenberger; Paul Borer; Heinz Singer
Journal:  Water Res X       Date:  2018-11-02

Review 6.  Environmental Impact of the Presence, Distribution, and Use of Artificial Sweeteners as Emerging Sources of Pollution.

Authors:  Ab Qayoom Naik; Tabassum Zafar; Vinoy Kumar Shrivastava
Journal:  J Environ Public Health       Date:  2021-04-14

7.  Metabolic effects of sucralose on environmental bacteria.

Authors:  Arthur Omran; Gregory Ahearn; Doria Bowers; Janice Swenson; Charles Coughlin
Journal:  J Toxicol       Date:  2013-12-03

8.  Online solid phase extraction liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (SPE-LC-MS/MS) method for the determination of sucralose in reclaimed and drinking waters and its photo degradation in natural waters from South Florida.

Authors:  Sudha Rani Batchu; Natalia Quinete; Venkata R Panditi; Piero R Gardinali
Journal:  Chem Cent J       Date:  2013-08-22       Impact factor: 4.215

Review 9.  A Review of the Environmental Fate and Effects of Acesulfame-Potassium.

Authors:  Kerry Belton; Edward Schaefer; Patrick D Guiney
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2020-04-10       Impact factor: 2.992

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.