| Literature DB >> 23975580 |
Feng Li1, Xiang-Yun Zeng, Chang-Hua Wu, Zhi-Peng Duan, Yan-Mao Wen, Guo-Ru Huang, Xiao-Lin Long, Min-Jian Li, Man-Jie Li, Jiang-Yu Xu.
Abstract
Sediments from 14 stations in the Foshan Waterway, a river crossing the industrial district of Guangdong Province, South China, were sampled and subsequently analyzed. The 14 stations were selected for the pollution discharging features of the river, such as the hydrology, the distribution of pollution sources, and the locations of wastewater outlets. The ecological risks were assessed, and the pollution sources were identified to provide valuable information for environmental impact assessment and pollution control. The spatial variability was high and the range were (in milligrams per kilogram dry weight): Pb, 46.0~382.8; Cu, 33.7~ 482.3; Zn, 62.2~1,568.7; Ni, 28.5~130.7; Cr, 34.7~1,656.1; Cd, 0.50~8.53; Hg, 0.02~8.27; and As, 5.77~66.09. The evaluation results of enrichment factor and potential ecological risk index indicate that the metal pollution in the surface and bottom sediments were severely polluted and could pose serious threat to the ecosystem in most stations. Although the hazard levels of the trace element differed among the stations, Hg was the most serious pollutant in all stations. The results of principal component analysis (PCA) show that the discharge of industrial wastewater is the most important polluting factor whereas domestic sewage, which contains a large amount of organic substances, accelerates metal deposition. And potential pollution sources were identified by the way of integrating the analysis results of PCA and data gained from the local government. Therefore, the conclusion is drawn that Foshan Waterway is seriously polluted with trace elements, both in the surface sediment (0 to 20 cm) and the bottom sediments (21 to 50 cm) are contaminated.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23975580 PMCID: PMC3785707 DOI: 10.1007/s12011-013-9789-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biol Trace Elem Res ISSN: 0163-4984 Impact factor: 3.738
Fig. 1Locations of Foshan Waterway (including its branches), Beijiang River, Guangzhou section of the Pearl River, and the sampling stations
Sediment sampling sites at Foshan Waterway
| Stations | Specific locations | Sampling strategy |
|---|---|---|
| S0 | Upstream Foshan Waterway, near Shakou Gate which is the starting point of the river. The coordinates: 23°2.24´ N, 113°1.81´ E | Located at the starting point of Foshan Waterway, and water flows from Beijiang River via Shiken Gate. There were no pollution sources nearby based on the results of pollution source investigation. It could serve as the referee site and baseline values could be obtained from the analytical results of sediments collected from the stations. |
| S1 | Upstream Foshan Waterway, about 200 m away from the mouth of Luocun Creek. The coordinates: 23°3.00´ N, 113°2.86´ E) | Influenced by sewage from Luocun Creek which is the main drainage of Luocun town where there are many small factories including electroplate industry, printing and dyeing industry, textile industry, battery and circuit board manufacturing and so on. Water upstream was polluted by industry and domestic wastewater, so it may be the interface of water quality. |
| S2 | Upstream Foshan Waterway, between the mouth of Luocun Creek and the mouth of Nanbeida Creek. The coordinates: 23°3.24´ N, 113°2.99´ E | Influenced by sewage from Luocun Creek and Nanbeida Creek, which is the main drainage of many dyeing factories. Impacted both by domestic sewage and industrial wastewater. Sewage mainly produced by an intensive residential area located in the right bank of the section of Foshan Waterway. Industrial wastewater mainly produced by the industrial zone located in the left bank of the river including knit dyeing factories, metal jewelry factories |
| S3 | Upstream Foshan Waterway, between the mouth of Nanbeida Creek and the mouth of Jiujiangji Creek. The coordinates: 23°3.16´ N, 113°4.21´ E | Influenced by sewage from Nanbeida Creek and Jiujiangji Creek. There was an industrial zone near Nanbeida Creek, where there were many factories including metal manufacturing, knitting and ceramics. In addition, there was a coal terminal near this station. |
| S4 | Midstream Foshan waterway, near the mouth of Jiaobian Creek. The coordinates: 23°3.01´ N, 113°5.74´ E | The station located in the bend reach of Foshan Waterway at the edge of Foshan City downtown. The water flow quietly, which facilitates the deposition of trace elements. The station was influenced by wastewater from Jiaobian Creek and Jiujiangji Creek. There were many paint manufacturing factories, printing and dyeing factories, and ceramics factories along the Jiujiangji Creek. |
| S5 | Midstream Foshan Waterway, about 100 m away from the mouth of Junqiao Creek. Downtown Foshan City. The coordinates: 23°2.97´ N, 113°6.86´ E | Influenced by domestic wastewater from downtown and sewage from Junqiao Creek, which is the largest creek of the Foshan Waterway. The river turns the corner here, and suspended solids carrying large amounts of pollutants may deposit here. This station was influenced by wastewater produced by electroplating industry, battery manufacturing, mechanical and electrical industry located in the right bank of the Foshan Waterway, and by wastewater produced by cosmetics, rubber manufacturing, leather production located in left bank of Junqiao Creek. |
| S5-1 | Midstream Foshan Waterway, near the mouth of Wusheng Creek. The coordinates: 23°3.51´ N, 113°6.98´ E | Influenced by the sewage from Wusheng Creek. There were some potential trace element pollution sources along it, such as cotton industry, electroplating industry, electric power industry. It is located near the shoal covered with vast areas of plants where trace elements may subside here. |
| S6 | Midstream Foshan Waterway, near the mouth of Xiebian Creek. The coordinates: 23°4.49´ N, 113°7.15´ E | Influenced by sewage from Xiebian Creek, Wusheng Creek, and Yuelisha Creek. There were some factories along Xiebian Creek, such as aluminum factory, printing and dyeing factory, and some potential trace element pollution sources, such as ceramics, stainless steel industry, located in the coast of Yuelisha Creek. |
| S7 | Downstream Foshan Waterway, between the mouth of Yuelisha Creek and the mouth of Huadi Creek. The coordinates: 23°4.50´ N, 113°9.92´ E | The shallow water had a slow flow speed and a grassy bank. This station was influenced by sewage from Wusheng Creek and Huadi Creek. There were also some trace element pollution industries, such as non-ferrous metal production, battery manufacturing, electronics manufacturing, located in the left bank of Foshan Waterway. |
| S8 | Downstream Foshan Waterway, between the mouth of Diejiao Creek and the mouth of Shian Creek. The coordinates: 23°4.03´ N, 113°10.48´ E | The broad river with slow flow speed was surrounded by luxuriant plants on the banks. This station was influenced by industry wastewater, which was discharging into the creek, produced by electroplating industry, ceramics and dyeing industry located in the Diejiao Creek basin and Shian Creek basin. |
| S9 | Downstream Foshan Waterway. Near the mouth of Sanzhou Creek. The coordinates: 23°2.73´ N, 113°12.42´ E | This station was influenced by the sewage from Sanzhou Creek which was an industry area containing the printing and dyeing, textile, glazed tiles industries located in the left bank and a community located in the right bank. |
| S10 | Downstream Junqiao Creek. The coordinates: 23°2.53´ N, 113°7.06´ E | This station was located in the bend of Junqiao Creek where the water flowed flatly and was influenced by the sewage downstream of Junqiao Creek. There were many factories including a clothing factory and leather factory located in the left bank of Junqiao Creek and the electroplating industry, paper mills, printing and dyeing, pottery industry located in the upper reach of Junqiao Creek. |
| S11 | Midstream Junqiao Creek. The coordinates: 23°1.61´ N, 113°8.11´ E | Water with slow flow speed was surrounded by luxuriant plants on the banks. This station was located in the edge of the old city center in Foshan and was influenced by the sewage from midstream of Junqiao Creek. The main pollution of this station was the sewage from the old city and some industrial wastewater, like ceramics. |
| S12 | Upstream Junqiao Creek. The coordinates: 23°1.64´ N, 113°8.37´ E | There has a Shiken Gate connecting the Beijiang River, located upstream of Junqiao Creek. The high-quality water from Beijiang river via this gate flows into Junqiao Creek. Herein, it was polluted less severely and has better water quality, but a number of lighting industry and the glass industry were also located in the vicinity. |
Fig. 2Concentrations of trace elements and organic carbon (OC) in sediments and the comparison with TEL (threshold effects level) of Pb, Cu, Zn, Ni, and Cd [64]
The comparison of trace element levels in Foshan Waterway with some others including freshwater, marine, and estuary sediments, also with PEL and TEL (milligrams per kilogram)
| Area | Reference | Trace elements | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pb | Cu | Zn | Ni | Cr | Cd | Hg | As | ||
| Range of this study | – | 46.0~382.8 | 33.7~482.3 | 62.2~1,568.7 | 28.5~130.7 | 34.7~1,656.1 | 0.50~8.53 | 0.02~8.27 | 5.77~66.09 |
| Average of this study | – | 189.3 | 185.7 | 523.6 | 70.6 | 349.5 | 3.43 | 4.35 | 34.01 |
| Seyhan dam, Turkey | [ | – | 19.80 ± 4.57 | 39.09 ± 6.50 | – | 118.95 ± 21.7 | 2.15 ± 0.38 | – | – |
| Yangtze River | [ | 18.3~44.1 | 6.87~49.7 | 47.6~154 | 17.6~48.0 | 36.9~173 | 0.12~0.75 | – | – |
| Lan-yang River | [ | 15.3~43.7 | 14.0~48.4 | 61.9~204 | 21.0~67.5 | 32.0~140 | 0.045~0.416 | <0.07 | 6.74~27.1 |
| Erh-jen River | [ | 16.2~84.3 | <0.005~237 | 81.4~1,230 | 14.1~231 | 29.9~687 | <0.0001~0.33 | <0.07~0.58 | 7.73~18.1 |
| The coastal wetland of the northern Beibu Gulf, South China Sea | [ | – | – | – | – | – | 0.08 ± 0.04 | 0.034 ± 0.028 | 8.1 ± 5.8 |
| Öre Estuary, Sweden | [ | – | – | – | – | – | – | 0.021–0.122 | – |
| Krka Estuary, Croatia | [ | – | – | – | – | – | – | 0.101–1.418 | – |
| TEL | [ | 34.983 | 35.968 | 122.395 | 18.113 | – | 0.56 | – | – |
| PEL | [ | 126.891 | 86.592 | 516.88 | 43.247 | – | 3.024 | – | – |
TEL threshold effect level, PEL probable effect levels
Fig. 3Enrichment factors (EF) calculated for trace elements Pb, Cu, Zn, Ni, Cr, Cd, Hg, and As in polluted sediments of Foshan Waterway and the evaluation results of pollution grading [65] based on EF
The toxicity coefficient (T ) that was used to calculate Hakanson potential ecological risk index [37]
| Cr | Cu | Zn | Pb | As | Hg | Cd | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 2 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 10 | 40 | 30 |
Fig. 4Hakanson potential ecological risk index (RI) in the sampling stations and the grading of pollution based on RI [37, 50, 67]
Fig. 5Hakanson potential ecological risk index (RI) for each element (firstly, RI values have been calculated by summing the RI values of each station with a view to comparing ecological risks of various elements, then they were taken with the logarithm)
Correlation coefficient matrix of the trace elements and organic carbon in sediments of Foshan Waterway
| Pb | Cu | Zn | Ni | Cr | Cd | Hg | As | OC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pb | 1.000 | ||||||||
| Cu | 0.836** | 1.000 | |||||||
| Zn | 0.659** | 0.556** | 1.000 | ||||||
| Ni | 0.795** | 0.819** | 0.689** | 1.000 | |||||
| Cr | 0.552** | 0.600** | 0.221 | 0.481** | 1.000 | ||||
| Cd | 0.765** | 0.733** | 0.569** | 0.796** | 0.533** | 1.000 | |||
| Hg | 0.353 | 0.277 | 0.498** | 0.290 | 0.210 | 0.062 | 1.000 | ||
| As | 0.592** | 0.407* | 0.672** | 0.400* | 0.421* | 0.509** | 0.396* | 1.000 | |
| OC | 0.398* | 0.229 | 0.380* | 0.308 | 0.075 | 0.319 | 0.444* | 0.381* | 1.000 |
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01
The two principal components that reflect most of the information of nine sedimentary variables
| Principal component 1 | Principal component 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Characteristic value | 3.984 | 2.394 |
| Contribution rate % | 44.263 | 26.598 |
| Accumulative contribution rate % | 44.263 | 70.862 |
| Load of Pb | 0.832 | 0.405 |
| Load of Cu | 0.888 | 0.197 |
| Load of Zn | 0.515 | 0.674 |
| Load of Ni | 0.849 | 0.294 |
| Load of Cr | 0.728 | 0.010 |
| Load of Cd | 0.881 | 0.169 |
| Load of Hg | 0.041 | 0.820 |
| Load of As | 0.447 | 0.615 |
| Load of OC | 0.092 | 0.757 |
Fig. 6The two principal components calculated by PCA reflecting the relationship of eight trace elements and OC
Fig. 7Potential pollution sources of Hg, Cd, As, Cu, Pb, Zn, Ni, Cr were identified by way of integrating the analysis results of PCA and data gained from the local government. Red arrows refer to the direction of water when the seawater is at high tide; black arrows refer to the direction of water when the seawater is at low tide