| Literature DB >> 31357738 |
Fang Xia1, Bifeng Hu2,3,4,5, Shuai Shao1, Dongyun Xu1, Yue Zhou1, Yin Zhou1,6, Mingxiang Huang7, Yan Li6, Songchao Chen8, Zhou Shi1.
Abstract
To verify the feasibility of portable X-ray fluorescence (PXRF) for rapidly analyzing, assessing and improving soil heavy metals mapping, 351 samples were collected from Fuyang District, Hangzhou City, in eastern China. Ordinary kriging (OK) and co-ordinary kriging (COK) combined with PXRF measurements were used to explore spatial patterns of heavy metals content in the soil. The Getis-Ord index was calculated to discern hot spots of heavy metals. Finally, multi-variable indicator kriging was conducted to obtain a map of multi-heavy metals pollution. The results indicated Cd is the primary pollution element in Fuyang, followed by As and Pb. Application of PXRF measurements as covariates in COK improved model accuracy, especially for Pb and Cd. Heavy metals pollution hot spots were mainly detected in northern Fuyang and plains along the Fuchun River in southern Fuyang because of mining, industrial and traffic activities, and irrigation with polluted water. Area with high risk of multi-heavy metals pollution mainly distributed in plain along the Fuchun River and the eastern Fuyang. These findings certified the feasibility of using PXRF as an efficient and reliable method for soil heavy metals pollution assessment and mapping, which could contribute to reduce the cost of surveys and pollution remediation.Entities:
Keywords: Co-Ordinary kriging; Portable X-ray fluorescence; heavy metals; hot spots; multi-heavy metals pollution risk; multi-variables indicator kriging
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31357738 PMCID: PMC6696468 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16152694
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Location of samples in study area.
Descriptive statistics of soil heavy metal concentrations measured by ICP-AES and PXRF (mg kg−1).
| Statistics | Method | MEAN | SD | MIN | MAX | CV% | SBC1 | SBC2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 5.8 | 1.1 | 3.8 | 8.01 | 18.9 | |||
| Cd | ICP-AES | 0.37 | 0.24 | 0.1 | 1.53 | 64.81 | 0.07 | 0.097 |
| PXRF | 0.41 | 0.2 | 0.15 | 1.6 | 48.65 | |||
| As | ICP-AES | 12.59 | 6.77 | 2.36 | 35.39 | 53.73 | 9.2 | 11.2 |
| PXRF | 12.73 | 5.11 | 1.69 | 25.68 | 40.17 | |||
| Pb | ICP-AES | 22.68 | 14.64 | 3.59 | 97.24 | 64.53 | 23.7 | 26 |
| PXRF | 22.59 | 10.12 | 5.63 | 62.01 | 44.79 | |||
| Cr | ICP-AES | 43.79 | 16.86 | 13.1 | 87.32 | 38.5 | 52.9 | 61 |
| PXRF | 43.86 | 13.64 | 6.14 | 85.34 | 31.1 | |||
| Ni | ICP-AES | 20.31 | 8.27 | 5.62 | 38.02 | 40.74 | 24.6 | 26.9 |
| PXRF | 21.18 | 8.01 | 0.86 | 52.03 | 37.8 |
MEAN represents the averaged value; SD represents standard deviation; MIN represents minimum value; MAX represents maximum value; CV represents coefficient of variation; SBC1 represents the background content of heavy metals in soil in China [42]. SBC2 represents the background content of heavy metals in soil in Zhejiang Province [43]. ICP-AES represents inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry; PXRF represents portable X-ray fluorescence.
Figure 2Scatter plot of Cr (a), Pb (b), Cd (c), As (d) and Ni (e) content measured by laboratory analysis (ICP-AES) and XRF (red dotted line represents the national limit value for corresponding heavy metals).
Heavy metals pollution grade classification based on the single pollution index (SPI).
| Element |
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As | Sample Number | 93 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Percentage | 95.88% | 4.12% | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Cd | Sample Number | 64 | 28 | 2 | 3 | 0 |
| Percentage | 65.98% | 28.86% | 2.06% | 3.09% | 0 | |
| Cr | Sample Number | 97 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Percentage | 100% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Pb | Sample Number | 96 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Percentage | 98.97% | 1.03% | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Ni | Sample Number | 97 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Percentage | 100% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Heavy metal pollution grade classification based on the Nemerow composite pollution index (NCPI).
| Pollution Grade | Count | Proportion |
|---|---|---|
| Safety | 52 | 53.61% |
| Alert | 27 | 27.84% |
| Slight pollution | 15 | 15.46% |
| Moderate pollution | 2 | 2.06% |
| Severe pollution | 1 | 1.03% |
Figure 3Spatial distribution of heavy metals content determined by ordinary kriging (OK): ((a) Cr, (c) Pb, (e) Cd, (g) As, (i) Ni) and co-ordinary kriging (COK): ((b) Cr, (d) Pb, (f) Cd, (h) As, (j) Ni).
Comparison of model accuracy of ordinary kriging (OK) and co-ordinary kriging (COK) for different heavy metals.
| Element | R2 | Concordance | RMSE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cr | OK | 0.706 | 0.83 | 8.76 |
| COK XRF | 0.714 | 0.83 | 8.70 | |
| Differences (%) | +1.13% | 0 | −0.68% | |
| Pb | OK | 0.456 | 0.655 | 8.60 |
| COK XRF | 0.514 | 0.696 | 8.21 | |
| Differences (%) | +12.72% | +4.66% | −4.54% | |
| Cd | OK | 0.624 | 0.766 | 0.13 |
| COK XRF | 0.687 | 0.818 | 0.12 | |
| Differences (%) | +10.10% | +6.79% | −7.70% | |
| As | OK | 0.450 | 0.65 | 4.75 |
| COK XRF | 0.480 | 0.67 | 4.64 | |
| Differences (%) | +6.67% | +3.08% | −2.32% | |
| Ni | OK | 0.715 | 0.84 | 4.64 |
| COK XRF | 0.722 | 0.84 | 4.63 | |
| Differences (%) | +0.98% | 0 | +0.22% | |
RMSE notes the Root Mean Square Error; PXRF notes portable X-ray fluorescence; COK: co-ordinary kriging; OK: ordinary kriging.
Figure 4Hotspots of individual pollution indexes for Cr (a), Pb (b), Cd (c), As (d), Ni (e) and Nemerow composite pollution index (f).
Figure 5Land use map of Fuyang.
Figure 6Spatial distribution of multi-heavy metals pollution risk produced by Multi-variables Indicator Kriging (MVIK).