| Literature DB >> 23951103 |
Min Jiang1, Guangming Zeng, Chang Zhang, Xiaoying Ma, Ming Chen, Jiachao Zhang, Lunhui Lu, Qian Yu, Langping Hu, Lifeng Liu.
Abstract
Xiawanggang River region is considered to be one of the most polluted areas in China due to its huge amount discharge of pollutants and accumulation for years. As it is one branch of Xiang River and the area downstream is Changsha city, the capital of Hunan Province, the ecological niche of Xiawangang River is very important. The pollution treatment in this area was emphasized in the Twelfth Five-Year Plan of Chinese government for Xiang River Water Environmental Pollution Control. In order to assess the heavy metal pollution and provide the base information in this region for The Twelfth Five-Year Plan, contents and fractions of four heavy metals (Cd, Cu, Pb and Zn) covering both sediments and soils were analyzed to study their contamination state. Three different indexes were applied to assess the pollution extent. The results showed this area was severely polluted by the four heavy metals, and the total concentrations exceeded the Chinese environmental quality standard for soil, grade III, especially for Cd. Moreover, Cd, rated as being in high risk, had a high mobility as its great contents of exchangeable and carbonates fractions in spite of its relative low content. Regression analysis revealed clay could well explain the regression equation for Cd, Cu and Zn while pH and sand could significantly interpret the regression equation for Pb. Moreover, there was a significant correlation between Non-residual fraction and I(geo) for all the four metals. Correlation analysis showed four metals maybe had similar pollution sources.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23951103 PMCID: PMC3738634 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071176
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Study area and geographical location of ten stations in Xiawangang River.
Pollution grades of geo-accumulation index of the metals.
| Classification |
| Pollution status |
| 0 |
| Unpolluted (UP) |
| 1 | 0< | Unpolluted to moderately polluted (UMP) |
| 2 | 1< | Moderately polluted (MP) |
| 3 | 2< | Moderately to strongly polluted (MSP) |
| 4 | 3< | Strongly polluted (SP) |
| 5 | 4< | Strongly to extremely polluted (SEP) |
| 6 |
| Extremely polluted (EP) |
The main characteristics and heavy metal concentrations in Xiawangang River.
| Site | pH | Carbonate | Total alkalinity | Sulphate | Chloride | Phosphate | Cd | Cu | Pb | Zn |
| 01 | 7.72 | 8.3 | 227.1 | 401.6 | 522.2 | 0.16 | 0.32 | 0.82 | 0.93 | 4.33 |
| 02 | 7.76 | ND | 291.8 | 436.2 | 357.9 | 0.18 | 0.15 | 0.62 | 0.82 | 3.82 |
| 03 | 8.34 | 9.9 | 156.9 | 218.9 | 261.6 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.75 | 0.64 | 2.79 |
| 04 | 7.93 | 16.5 | 214.7 | 188.3 | 618.5 | 0.09 | 0.07 | 0.31 | 1.21 | 5.47 |
| 05 | 8.25 | 11.6 | 273.9 | 37.1 | 473.6 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.43 | 0.97 | 5.69 |
| Xiang River | 7.52 | ND | 92.2 | 17.8 | 12.6 | 0.11 | 0.001 | 0.005 | 0.004 | 0.02 |
| Reference value | 6–9 | – | – | – | – | 1.0 | 0.1 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 5.0 |
Surface water at the site of sediment.
Surface water at the site of Xiang River (Zhuzhou section).
Not detected (ND).
Concentration (mg/L).
Integrated Wastewater Discharge Standard (GB 8978–1996).
The main characteristics and heavy metal concentrations in soil and sediment samples from Xiawangang River.
| Site | pH | OM | Sand(%) | Silt(%) | Clay(%) | BD | PS | OC | Cd | Cu | Pb | Zn | |
| Soil | T01 | 7.69 | 10.40 | 35.71 | 35.63 | 28.66 | 1.20 | 48.90 | 52.41 | 220.8±9.7 | 425.8±13.2 | 762.3±9.4 | 4842.1±131.3 |
| T02 | 8.12 | 11.18 | 25.46 | 39.15 | 35.39 | 1.15 | 50.32 | 72.29 | 512.1±13.8 | 864.1±19.0 | 4472.7±61.6 | 14105.5±378.7 | |
| T03 | 7.86 | 11.63 | 26.59 | 33.90 | 39.51 | 1.16 | 49.18 | 57.61 | 499.9±19.9 | 920.5±27.1 | 5146.3±74.5 | 12491.2±549.2 | |
| T04 | 8.04 | 7.50 | 42.62 | 38.04 | 19.34 | 1.20 | 49.01 | 42.64 | 53.5±9.0 | 460.3±18.7 | 2213.9±75.4 | 3734.4±57.8 | |
| T05 | 7.66 | 10.21 | 32.80 | 45.80 | 21.40 | 1.17 | 48.82 | 60.32 | 56.9±10.8 | 469.0±16.4 | 1629.2±49.8 | 5615.5±76.5 | |
| Sediment | N01 | 8.41 | 4.16 | 62.59 | 23.64 | 13.77 | 1.31 | 23.31 | 21.90 | 50.2±9.3 | 213.9±11.8 | 308.2±11.3 | 2139.9±65.0 |
| N02 | 8.13 | 9.19 | 50.71 | 19.89 | 29.40 | 1.27 | 18.44 | 51.48 | 112.0±7.5 | 464.7±8.1 | 1050.0±42.8 | 4110.3±140.0 | |
| N03 | 7.86 | 11.36 | 54.70 | 26.04 | 19.26 | 1.32 | 20.72 | 59.70 | 173.1±14.5 | 323.1±18.4 | 344.0±9.2 | 5075.8±127.8 | |
| N04 | 8.19 | 4.64 | 57.50 | 29.05 | 13.45 | 1.38 | 24.61 | 31.37 | 96.0±11.8 | 454.7±13.4 | 712.5±10.2 | 2989.9±173.9 | |
| N05 | 8.04 | 7.27 | 60.65 | 20.57 | 18.78 | 1.37 | 21.90 | 33.75 | 13.8±4.2 | 358.9±8.9 | 616.2±7.6 | 1898.1±154.0 | |
| RV | National standard-Grade I | 0.02 | 35 | 35 | 100 | ||||||||
| National standard- Grade II | 0.6 | 100 | 350 | 300 | |||||||||
| National standard- Grade III | 1.0 | 400 | 500 | 500 | |||||||||
| Background of Hunan Province | 0.079 | 25.4 | 27.3 | 88.6 | |||||||||
Organic matter content (OM) (%).
Bulk density (BD) (g/cm3).
Pore space (PS) (%).
Organic carbon (OC) (g kg-1).
Heavy metal concentration (µg g-1). Results are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation.
Reference value (RV).
Environment quality standard for soils in china (National Environment Protection Agency of China, 1995). Grade I was mainly suitable for the soil of nature reserve, sources of drinking water, tea plantation, pasture, and other protected areas; Grade II was mainly applicable to the soil of general farmland, vegetable and Orchard; Grade III primarily suitable for the soil of woodland, and the soil of high background values which had high concentration of pollutants, also including the farmland near the mine.
Figure 2Ratio pollution index of Cd, Cu, Pb and Zn in sediment and soil samples from Xiawangang River.
Comparison the metal concentrations of Xiawangang River with the other rivers (BDL is below detection limit).
| Location | Metal concentration/µg g-1 | References | |||
| Cd | Cu | Pb | Zn | ||
| Xiawangang River, sediment, China | 13.8–173.1 | 213.9–464.7 | 308.2–1050.0 | 1898.1–5075.8 | This study |
| Xiawangang River, soil, China | 53.5–512.1 | 425.8–920.5 | 762.3–5146.3 | 3734.4–14105.5 | This study |
| Tigris River, sediment, Turkey | 0.7–4.9 | 11.2–5075.6 | 62.3–566.6 | 60.1–2396 |
|
| Gomti River, sediment, India | 0.34–8.38 | BDL-35.03 | 6.27–75.33 | 3.06–101.73 |
|
| Hindon River, sediment, India | BDL-11.80 | 0.85–282.25 | 12.00–380.50 | 14.50–404.50 |
|
| Dommel River, soil, Netherlands | 0.72–10.9 | 5.79–39.6 | – | 48.3–310 |
|
| Solofrana river valley, soil, Italy | – | 70–565 | 21–98 | 72–135 |
|
| Luan River, sediment, China | 0.03–0.37 | 6.47–178.61 | 8.65–38.29 | 21.09–25.66 |
|
| Shing River, sediment, Hong Kong | 22–47 | 207–1660 | 126–345 | 32–2200 |
|
Figure 3Fractionation of Cd, Cu, Pb and Zn in sediment and soil samples from Xiawangang River.
F1: exchangeable, F2: bound to carbonates, F3: bound to Fe/Mn oxides, F4: bound to organic matter, F5: residual.
Heavy metal geo-accumulation index (I) in soil and sediment samples from Xiawangang River.
| Site |
| |||
| Cd | Cu | Pb | Zn | |
| T01 | 10.86/EP | 3.48/SP | 4.22/SEP | 5.19/EP |
| T01 | 12.08/EP | 4.50/SEP | 6.77/EP | 6.73/EP |
| T01 | 12.04/EP | 4.59/SEP | 6.97/EP | 6.55/EP |
| T01 | 8.82/EP | 3.59/SP | 5.76/EP | 4.81/SEP |
| T01 | 8.91/EP | 3.62/SP | 5.31/EP | 5.40/EP |
| Mean | 10.54/EP | 3.96/SP | 5.81/EP | 5.74/EP |
| N01 | 8.73/EP | 2.49/MSP | 2.91/MSP | 4.01/SEP |
| N01 | 9.88/EP | 3.61/SP | 4.68/SEP | 4.95/SEP |
| N01 | 10.51/EP | 3.08/SP | 3.07/SP | 5.26/EP |
| N01 | 9.66/EP | 3.58/SP | 4.12/SEP | 4.49/SEP |
| N01 | 6.87/EP | 3.24/SP | 3.91/SP | 3.84/SP |
| Mean | 9.13/EP | 3.20/SP | 3.74/SP | 4.51/SEP |
Risk assessment codes of heavy metals in soil and sediment samples from Xiawangang River.
| Site | RAC/R | |||
| Cd | Cu | Pb | Zn | |
| T01 | 16.90%/MR | 1.49%/LR | 0.42%/NR | 18.01%/MR |
| T02 | 55.25%/VHR | 9.50%/LR | 8.62%/LR | 24.07%/MR |
| T03 | 48.41%/HR | 3.25%/LR | 0.70%/LR | 12.89%/MR |
| T04 | 55.10%/VHR | 14.76%/MR | 29.68%/MR | 19.74%/MR |
| T05 | 46.46%/HR | 8.79%/LR | 4.80%/LR | 30.11%/MR |
| Mean | 44.43%/HR | 7.56%/LR | 8.84%/LR | 20.97%/MR |
| N01 | 80.61%/VHR | 22.16%/MR | 15.52%/MR | 50.27%/HR |
| N02 | 8.38%/LR | 0.89%/LR | 0%/NR | 10.59%/MR |
| N03 | 14.41%/MR | 2.67%/LR | 0.15%/NR | 29.01%/MR |
| N04 | 29.88%/MR | 2.33%/LR | 1.42%/LR | 19.62%/MR |
| N05 | 55.56%/VHR | 14.84%/MR | 12.89%/MR | 27.37%/MR |
| Mean | 37.77%/HR | 8.58%/LR | 6.00%/LR | 27.37%/MR |
The results of the global test of regression analysis.
| Model | R | R2 | Adjusted R2 | F | Sig. | Durbin-Watson |
| Stepwise (Cd) | 0.857 | 0.735 | 0.702 | 22.159 | 0.002 | 2.466 |
| Stepwise (Cu) | 0.854 | 0.729 | 0.695 | 21.469 | 0.002 | 1.792 |
| Stepwise (Pb) | 0.903 | 0.816 | 0.763 | 15.497 | 0.003 | 1.523 |
| Stepwise (Zn) | 0.848 | 0.719 | 0.684 | 20.443 | 0.002 | 2.452 |
P<0.01.
Cd = Constant, Clay.
Cu = Constant, Clay.
Pb = Constant, Sand, pH.
Zn = Constant, Clay.
The results of regression coefficients and collinearity diagnosis.
| Independent Variable | Coefficients | t | Sig. | Tolerance | VIF | ||
| Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | ||||||
| Stepwise (Cd) | Constant | −241.814 | −2.551 | 0.034 | |||
| Clay | 17.603 | 0.857 | 4.707 | 0.002 | 1.000 | 1.000 | |
| Stepwise (Cu) | Constant | −18.144 | −0.154 | 0.881 | |||
| Clay | 21.495 | 0.854 | 4.634 | 0.002 | 1.000 | 1.000 | |
| Stepwise (Pb) | Constant | −20290.647 | −1.825 | 0.111 | |||
| Sand | −132.603 | −1.081 | −5.500 | 0.001 | 0.681 | 1.469 | |
| pH | 3496.802 | 0.470 | 2.393 | 0.048 | 0.681 | 1.469 | |
| Stepwise (Zn) | Constant | −3844.798 | −1.717 | 0.124 | |||
| Clay | 399.442 | 0.848 | 4.521 | 0.002 | 1.000 | 1.000 | |
P<0.05,
P<0.01.
Cd = Constant, Clay.
Cu = Constant, Clay.
Pb = Constant, Sand, pH.
Zn = Constant, Clay.
Pearson correlation coefficients of heavy metals (n = 10).
| Cd | Cu | Pb | Zn | |
| Cd | 1 | 0.890 | 0.849 | 0.957 |
| Cu | 1 | 0.962 | 0.931 | |
| Pb | 1 | 0.918 | ||
| Zn | 1 |
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).
Figure 4Relationships between the speciation concentrations and the corresponding I.