| Literature DB >> 27844323 |
Guangming Zhao1,2,3, Siyuan Ye4,5, Hongming Yuan1, Xigui Ding1, Jin Wang1.
Abstract
Grain size and concentrations of heavy metals (arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), mercury (Hg), lead (Pb), and zinc (Zn)) of 148 surface sediments and activities of 210Pb and heavy metal concetrantions of one sediment core from the Pearl River Estuary were analyzed. The surface sediments were dominated by silt and sandy silt. Sediment type controlled the spatial distribution patterns of the heavy metals. The heavy metal concentrations in the sediments ranged from 3.34 to 37.11 mg/kg for As, 0.06 to 2.06 mg/kg for Cd, 12 to 130 mg/kg for Cr, 5.8 to 170.6 mg/kg for Cu, 0.01 to 0.25 mg/kg for Hg, 23 to 78 mg/kg for Pb, and 32 to 259 mg/kg for Zn. Both contents of clay and organic carbons were significantly positively correlated with heavy metals. The baseline values of elements in the study area were 12.97 mg/kg for As, 0.14 mg/kg for Cd, 68 mg/kg for Cr, 28.9 mg/kg for Cu, 0.08 mg/kg for Hg, 33 mg/kg for Pb, and 92 mg/kg for Zn. The metal enrichment factor (EF) and geoaccumulation index (Igeo) were calculated to assess anthropogenic contamination. Results showed slight to moderate Cd contamination in the region. Principle component analysis indicated that Cd could be attributed to anthropogenic sources; As and Hg were predominantly affected by human activities; and Pb, Cr, Cu, and Zn were associated with both natural and anthropogenic sources.Entities:
Keywords: Heavy metals; Pearl River Estuary; Pollution assessment; Sediment properties
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27844323 PMCID: PMC5340854 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-016-8003-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ISSN: 0944-1344 Impact factor: 4.223
Fig. 1Location of the study area and sampling sites
Analytical methods and detection limits
| Indicator | Analytical method | Detection limit | Unit |
|---|---|---|---|
| As | AFS | 1 | μg/g |
| Cd | ICP-MS | 0.02 | μg/g |
| Cr | XRF | 5 | μg/g |
| Cu | ICP-MS | 1 | μg/g |
| Hg | AFS | 0.003 | μg/g |
| Pb | XRF | 2 | μg/g |
| Zn | XRF | 2 | μg/g |
| Mn | XRF | 10 | μg/g |
| Sr | XRF | 5 | μg/g |
| Al2O3 | XRF | 0.05 | % |
| Fe2O3 | XRF | 0.05 | % |
| K2O | XRF | 0.05 | % |
| CaO | XRF | 0.05 | % |
| Corg. | Electric potential | 0.10 | % |
Fig. 2Percentage concentration of sand, silt, and clay (black lines) and sediment classification (red lines) in PRE
Fig. 3Spatial distribution of the surface sediment types in PRE
Fig. 4Concentrations of heavy metals, Corg, Al2O3, and Fe2O3 in the surface sediments of PRE
Mean grain size, organic carbon (Corg), and heavy metal concentration in the surface sediments of PRE
| Station | Mz (φ) | As (mg/kg) | Cd (mg/kg) | Cr (mg/kg) | Cu (mg/kg) | Hg (mg/kg) | Pb (mg/kg) | Zn (mg/kg) | Al2O3 (%) | Corg (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Min | 2.32 | 3.34 | 0.06 | 12.00 | 5.80 | 0.01 | 23.00 | 32.00 | 5.65 | 0.16 |
| Max | 7.41 | 37.11 | 2.06 | 130.00 | 170.60 | 0.25 | 78.00 | 259.00 | 20.68 | 1.85 |
| Average | 6.29 | 21.99 | 0.46 | 78.37 | 46.76 | 0.13 | 49.66 | 143.10 | 15.24 | 0.90 |
| S.D. | 1.05 | 8.03 | 0.37 | 22.42 | 22.76 | 0.05 | 11.66 | 47.93 | 3.48 | 0.26 |
| C.V. | 16.63% | 36.49% | 79.18% | 28.60% | 48.67% | 39.51% | 23.48% | 33.49% | 22.83% | 28.69% |
Mz mean grain size, Min minimum values, Average average values, S.D. standard deviation, C.V. coefficient of variation
Pearson correlation coefficient matrix of heavy metals, major elements, Corg, and clay in the surface sediments of PRE
| As | Cd | Cr | Cu | Hg | Pb | Zn | Corg | Al2O3 | Clay | Fe2O3 | Sr | CaO | K2O | Mn | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As | 1.000 | 0.794** | 0.839** | 0.814** | 0.900** | 0.780** | 0.863** | 0.722** | 0.645** | 0.408** | 0.828** | −0.116 | −0.253** | 0.269** | 0.730** |
| Cd | 1.000 | 0.785** | 0.756** | 0.849** | 0.604** | 0.798** | 0.629** | 0.357** | 0.361** | 0.717** | −0.299** | −0.299** | −0.002 | 0.702** | |
| Cr | 1.000 | 0.855** | 0.890** | 0.746** | 0.926** | 0.821** | 0.698** | 0.462** | 0.921** | 0.011 | −0.153 | 0.272** | 0.750** | ||
| Cu | 1.000 | 0.860** | 0.834** | 0.890** | 0.770** | 0.689** | 0.468** | 0.810** | −0.088 | −0.278** | 0.341** | 0.647** | |||
| Hg | 1.000 | 0.765** | 0.923** | 0.765** | 0.572** | 0.392** | 0.844** | −0.055 | −0.163* | 0.149 | 0.749** | ||||
| Pb | 1.000 | 0.872** | 0.723** | 0.801** | 0.499** | 0.711** | 0.011 | −0.289** | 0.588** | 0.537** | |||||
| Zn | 1.000 | 0.813** | 0.675** | 0.426** | 0.842** | −0.019 | −0.211** | 0.309** | 0.723** | ||||||
| Corg | 1.000 | 0.659** | 0.418** | 0.753** | 0.034 | −0.159 | 0.351** | 0.593** | |||||||
| Al2O3 | 1.000 | 0.553** | 0.734** | 0.114 | −0.227** | 0.761** | 0.470** | ||||||||
| Clay | 1.000 | 0.525** | 0.055 | −0.097 | 0.325** | 0.415** | |||||||||
| Fe2O3 | 1.000 | 0.116 | −0.073 | 0.307** | 0.799** | ||||||||||
| Sr | 1.000 | 0.854** | 0.064 | 0.013 | |||||||||||
| CaO | 1.000 | −0.308** | −0.047 | ||||||||||||
| K2O | 1.000 | 0.154 | |||||||||||||
| Mn | 1.000 |
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)
Comparison of heavy metal of surface sediments in PRE(unit: mg/kg)
| Location | As | Cd | Cr | Cu | Hg | Pb | Zn | Reference | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study area | Average | 21.99 | 0.46 | 78.37 | 46.76 | 0.13 | 49.66 | 143.10 | This study |
| Pearl River Estuary, China | na | na | 106 | 45.7 | na | 57.9 | 176.8 | Yu et al.( | |
| Pearl River Estuary, China | 17.42 | 0.29 | na | na | na | 40.51 | 109.49 | Ye et al.( | |
| Daya Bay, China | na | na | 75.6 | 12.7 | na | 32.7 | 94.4 | Yu et al.( | |
| Daya Bay, China | na | 0.052 | na | 20.8 | na | 45.7 | 113 | Gao et al.( | |
| Western Xiamen Bay,China | na | 0.33 | 75 | 44 | na | 50 | 139 | Zhang et al.( | |
| Eastern Beibu Bay, China | 9.53 | 0.16 | 53.65 | 58.26 | 0.06 | 27.99 | 67.28 | Dou et al.( | |
| Southern Bohai Bay, China | na | 0.14 | 33.5 | 22.7 | na | 21.7 | 71.7 | Hu et al.( | |
| Liaodong Bay, China | 8.3 | na | 46.4 | 19.4 | 0.04 | 31.8 | 71.7 | Hu et al.( | |
| Changjiang Estuary, China | na | 0.26 | 78.9 | 30.7 | na | 31.8 | 94.3 | Zhang et al.( | |
| South China Sea, China | na | 0.40 | 105 | 38.1 | na | 23.6 | 87.4 | Zhu et al.( | |
| Near-shore area, north Shandong Peninsula, China | 8.9 | 0.09 | 59 | 18.7 | na | 18.2 | 61 | Xu et al.( | |
| Primary standard, China | 20 | 0.5 | 80 | 35 | 0.2 | 60 | 150 | CSBTS( |
Fig. 5Profile distributions of 210Pb and 210Pb-derived chronology from the core SSZ15
Fig. 6Enrichment factor (EF) of heavy metals in the surface sediments of PRE
Fig. 7Geo-accumulation index (Igeo) of heavy metals in the surface sediments of PRE
Total variance explained and rotated component matrix of principal components analysis
| Elements | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| As | 0.856 | 0.277 | −0.180 |
| Cd | 0.840 | −0.085 | −0.172 |
| Cr | 0.859 | 0.402 | 0.026 |
| Cu | 0.704 | 0.394 | −0.213 |
| Hg | 0.924 | 0.241 | −0.127 |
| Pb | 0.660 | 0.619 | −0.149 |
| Zn | 0.876 | 0.373 | −0.124 |
| Corg. | 0.654 | 0.509 | 0.46 |
| Al2O3 | 0.488 | 0.830 | 0.69 |
| Clay | 0.440 | 0.421 | 0.100 |
| Fe2O3 | 0.827 | 0.435 | 0.117 |
| Sr | −0.055 | 0.146 | 0.965 |
| CaO | −0.104 | −0.195 | 0.954 |
| K2O | 0.038 | 0.920 | −0.101 |
| Mn | 0.811 | 0.097 | 0.070 |
| % of variance | 46.30 | 21.41 | 13.66 |
| % of cumulative | 46.30 | 67.71 | 81.37 |
Extraction method: principal component analysis. Rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalization. Rotation converged in three iterations
Fig. 8Principal component loading of heavy metals, major elements, Corg, and clay