| Literature DB >> 24806195 |
Ding-Yan Lin1, Yi-Pin Lee2, Chiu-Ping Li3, Kai-Hsien Chi4, Bo-Wei P Liang5, Wen-Yao Liu6, Chih-Cheng Wang7, Susana Lin8, Ting-Chien Chen9, Kuei-Jyum C Yeh10, Ping-Chi Hsu11, Yi-Chyun Hsu12, How-Ran Chao13, Tsui-Chun Tsou14.
Abstract
Our goal was to determine dioxin levels in 800 soil samples collected from Taiwan. An in vitro DR-CALUX® assay was carried out with the help of an automated Soxhlet system and fast cleanup column. The mean dioxin level of 800 soil samples was 36.0 pg-bioanalytical equivalents (BEQs)/g dry weight (d.w.). Soil dioxin-BEQs were higher in northern Taiwan (61.8 pg-BEQ/g d.w.) than in central, southern, and eastern Taiwan (22.2, 24.9, and 7.80 pg-BEQ/g d.w., respectively). Analysis of multiple linear regression models identified four major predictors of dioxin-BEQs including soil sampling location (β = 0.097, p < 0.001), land use (β = 0.065, p < 0.001), soil brightness (β = 0.170, p < 0.001), and soil moisture (β = 0.051, p = 0.020), with adjusted R2 = 0.947 (p < 0.001) (n = 662). An univariate logistic regression analysis with the cut-off point of 33.4 pg-BEQ/g d.w. showed significant odds ratios (ORs) for soil sampling location (OR = 2.43, p < 0.001), land use (OR = 1.47, p < 0.001), and soil brightness (OR = 2.83, p = 0.009). In conclusion, four variables, including soil sampling location, land use, soil brightness, and soil moisture, may be related to soil-dioxin contamination. Soil samples collected in northern Taiwan, and especially in Bade City, soils near industrial areas, and soils with darker color may contain higher dioxin-BEQ levels.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24806195 PMCID: PMC4053921 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph110504886
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The sampling map of soil dioxin contamination is shown for a national dioxin survey in Taiwan. Soil samples are collected from northern, central, southern, and eastern Taiwan.
Descriptive analysis of a dioxin survey in Taiwanese soil (N = 685).
| Soil Characteristics | Location in Taiwan | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Northern | Central | Southern | Eastern | |||
| Frequency (Number) | ||||||
| 0.696 | ||||||
| Light | ||||||
| Yellow brown | 7 | 9 | 8 | 2 | ||
| Medium | ||||||
| Gray | 31 | 39 | 18 | 18 | ||
| Brown | 94 | 143 | 72 | 58 | ||
| Charcoal gray | 43 | 47 | 28 | 39 | ||
| Dark | ||||||
| Black brown | 7 | 8 | 5 | 3 | ||
| Black | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 0.036 | ||||||
| 10 cm | 128 | 168 | 107 | 82 | ||
| 15 cm | 56 | 79 | 25 | 40 | ||
| 0.321 | ||||||
| Clay | 4 | 5 | 6 | 1 | ||
| Silt | 2 | 4 | 5 | 2 | ||
| Sand | 178 | 238 | 121 | 119 | ||
| 0.794 | ||||||
| Wet | 70 | 103 | 53 | 45 | ||
| Dry | 114 | 144 | 79 | 77 | ||
| <0.001 | ||||||
| Wasteland | 42 | 39 | 6 | 57 | ||
| Industry | 44 | 23 | 88 | 43 | ||
| Park near residential area | 10 | 20 | 13 | 15 | ||
| Food production near industrial area | 84 | 158 | 0 | 4 | ||
| Others | 4 | 7 | 2 | 3 | ||
| Missing | 0 | 0 | 23 | 0 | ||
| Mean ± SD (pg-BEQ/g d.w.) | ||||||
| DR-CALUX® assay | 61.8 ± 62.3 | 22.2 ± 12.8 | 24.9 ± 26.3 | 7.80 ± 5.08 | <0.001 | |
Notes: Fisher’s exact test was calculated when the expected values in any of the cells of a contingency table were below 5, and chi-square test was used when they were above 5. Food production district: agriculture, fisheries, and livestock. Schools, public buildings, and government institutions. No coding or missing data. Kruskal-Wallis H test. * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.
Figure 2Dioxin concentrations in Taiwanese soil from 10 cities, districts, or townships (n = 685). The dioxin levels are markedly higher in soil collected from Bade City than in soil collected from the other surveyed areas (p < 0.001); significantly higher in Guanyin, Siaogang, and Houli than in the other areas except for Bade City (p < 0.05 or p < 0.001); significantly higher in Kuanhsi and Shengang than in Pitou, Sincheng, Dashu, and Hualien City (p < 0.001); slightly higher in Pitou than in Sincheng, Dashu, and Hualien City (p < 0.05), and lowest in Sincheng, Dashu, and Hualien City among the 10 selected survey areas (p < 0.05 or p < 0.001).
Figure 3Dioxin concentrations are shown for soils of different brightness (three colors) (n = 685). Dioxin levels are similar in the three soils of different color and marginally significantly different between light and dark soils (p = 0.053).
Figure 4Dioxin-BEQs in clay, silt, and sand in our soil samples (n = 685). Dioxin concentrations are similar among clays, silts, and sands (p = 0.596).
Figure 5Dioxin concentrations in Taiwanese soil depend on land use (n = 685). The dioxin concentration in soil used for food production near an industrial area is notably higher than that in soil from the other areas (p < 0.01 or p < 0.001). Soil dioxin levels in parks near residential areas, industrial areas, and wasteland areas are significantly higher than those in land used for other purposes (p < 0.01).
Univariate logistic regression to obtain odds ratios of Taiwanese soil dioxin concentrations >3rd quartile (33.4 pg-BEQ/g d.w.) according to soil sampling location, land use, soil brightness, soil moisture, and soil depth (n = 662).
| DR-CALUX | Odds Ratio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil Sampling Location | Purpose of Land Use | Soil Brightness | Soil Moisture | Soil Depth | |
| <33.4 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| >33.4 | 2.43 | 1.47 | 2.83 | 1.14 | 0.961 |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.009 | 0.574 | 0.835 | |
Notes: The 75th percentile (3rd quartile) of DR-CALUX concentration was 33.4 pg BEQ/g d.w., ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis identifying the soil characteristics predicting DR-CALUX concentration (n=662).
| Dependent Variable | Predictors | Beta | Adjusted R Square | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Log10 DR-CALUX | Soil sampling location | 0.097 | <0.001 | 0.947 | <0.001 |
| Purpose of land use | 0.065 | <0.001 | |||
| Soil brightness | 0.170 | <0.001 | |||
| Soil moisture | 0.051 | 0.020 |
Notes: * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.