| Literature DB >> 32591606 |
Junyong Ma1, Zhanjun Quan2, Yibo Sun1, Jiaqiang Du1, Bo Liu1.
Abstract
Coal gangue piles accumulate outside mines and can persist for years, negatively impacting the regional environment. To determine the main cause of soil pollution at coal gangues, several coal gangues in Guizhou Province, China that had undergone natural recovery via native plants for 8 years were investigated in summer 2019. Three plots (2 m × 2 m) from the coal gangue area were selected for the treatment (GP). Control plots that were 100 m away from GP were also investigated in contrast (CK-near). In addition, plots from forest, farmland and lake land that were far from GP and largely undisturbed were also investigated as more extreme contrasts (CK-far). A series of soil indicators that can be affected by coal-gangue, such as heavy metals (Mn, Cr, Cd, Ni, Zn, Cu, Pb), As, pH, cation exchange capacity (CEC), sulfur (S) and iron (Fe), were tested for in the plots. Plant species, coverage and height were also analyzed to uncover biodiversity and dominant species information. The results suggested that coal gangue significantly influences soil S, pH and plant species after 8 years of natural recovery. The CK-far plots contained relatively low soil sulfur content, normal pH (close to 7) and abundant plant biodiversity. Generally, pH related positively with both the Patrick (R = 0.79, n = 22, p < 0.001) and Shannon indices (R = 0.67, n = 22, p < 0.001); the soil S related negatively with both the Patrick (R = 0.85, n = 22, p < 0.001) and Shannon indices (R = - 0.79, n = 22, p < 0.001). S content was highest (S = 1.0%) in GP plots, was lower in CK-near plots (S = 0.3%) and was the lowest of all in the plots distant from the coal mine (S = 0.1%, CK-far). S content was negatively correlated with pH. Soil pH decreased significantly, from 7.0 in CK-far, to 5.9 in CK-near, to 4.2 in GP. Soil Fe was 3.4 times higher in GP and CK-near than in CK-far. The excess sulfur and Fe elements and the acidified soil drove changes in soil and vegetation in the coal gangue areas. After 8 years of natural recovery, only a few plants, like Miscanthus floridulus, were able to live near the coal gangue in the area where the soil was still acidic and high in S and Fe.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32591606 PMCID: PMC7320150 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-67311-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
One-way Anova for soil properties between treatments.
| Soil properties | F | p |
|---|---|---|
| pH | 20.815 | |
| Fe | 7.321 | |
| S | 22.457 | |
| CEC | 1.153 | 0.337 |
| As | 1.812 | 0.191 |
| Cd | 4.141 | |
| Cu | 0.192 | 0.827 |
| Pb | 1.438 | 0.262 |
| Ni | 2.222 | 0.136 |
| Zn | 3.675 | |
| Mn | 1.002 | 0.387 |
| Cr | 0.246 | 0.784 |
| Hg | 0.105 | 0.901 |
| Patrick | 18.670 | |
| Shannon | 27.744 | |
| Pielou | 5.495 |
Bold values indicate p < 0.05.
Figure 1Difference in soil pH (a), S (b) and Fe levels (c) between abandoned and undisturbed plots. GP: plots in the gangue; CK-near: plots 100 m from the gangue; CK-far: plots distant from the gangue. Three plots were demarcated and investigated for each type.
Soil heavy metals content distribute between treatments.
| CEC (cmol/kg) | As (mg/kg) | Cd (mg/kg) | Cu (mg/kg) | Pb (mg/kg) | Ni (mg/kg) | Zn (mg/kg) | Mn (mg/kg) | Cr (mg/kg) | Hg (mg/kg) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GP | 15.2 ± 1.92 | 8.4 ± 1.98 | 0.8 ± 0.14 | 61 ± 8.93 | 14.1 ± 3.93 | 13.3 ± 3.92 | 40.5 ± 22.22 | 215.1 ± 137.43 | 83.4 ± 10.06 | 0.01 ± 0.0015 |
| CK-near | 13 ± 3.71 | 7.9 ± 1.46 | 0.7 ± 0.21 | 63.2 ± 7.97 | 20.2 ± 2.22 | 17.6 ± 7.68 | 54.7 ± 18.07 | 418.4 ± 309.51 | 86 ± 0.46 | 0.01 ± 0.001 |
| CK-far | 12.9 ± 2.19 | 10.5 ± 2.02 | 1.3 ± 0.74 | 57.2 ± 32.99 | 19.3 ± 2.3 | 30 ± 25.81 | 95.2 ± 49.29 | 462.8 ± 183.76 | 81.8 ± 16.83 | 0.01 ± 0.0033 |
Figure 2Differences in plant biodiversity indices of Patrick (a), Shannon (b) and Pielou (c) between abandoned and undisturbed plots. GP: plots in the gangue; CK-near: plots 100 m from the gangue; CK-far: plots distant from the gangue. Three plots were demarcated and investigated for each type.
Basic geographic and vegetation information.
| Plots treatments | Geographical coordinates | Altitude (m) | Treatment | Order number | Family number | Plant total number | Cover (%) | Height (cm) | Dominant species |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plot-1 | 106°34′55″E, 26°29′21″N | 1,147 | GP-1 | 5 | 7 | 291 | 75 | 26 | |
| GP-2 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 100 | 85 | ||||
| GP-3 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 80 | 50 | ||||
| CK-near-1 | 6 | 7 | 297 | 70 | 42 | ||||
| CK-near-2 | 7 | 8 | 93 | 50 | 82.5 | ||||
| CK-near-3 | 6 | 7 | 112 | 60 | 43 | ||||
| Plot-2 | 106°34′04″E, 26°31′33″N | 1,194 | GP-1 | 3 | 3 | 130 | 100 | 50 | |
| GP-2 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 60 | 42 | ||||
| GP-3 | 4 | 5 | 52 | 80 | 51.3 | ||||
| CK-near-1 | 5 | 7 | 33 | 40 | 59.3 | ||||
| CK-near-2 | 6 | 7 | 51 | 30 | 39 | ||||
| CK-near-3 | 6 | 8 | 202 | 45 | 65.6 | ||||
| Plot-3 | 106°33′44″E, 26°31′23″N | 1,258 | GP-1 | 3 | 5 | 36 | 46 | 47 | |
| GP-2 | 3 | 4 | 54 | 34 | 54 | ||||
| GP-3 | 2 | 2 | 34 | 56 | 90 | ||||
| CK-near-1 | 6 | 6 | 33 | 65 | 43.1 | ||||
| CK-near-2 | 10 | 12 | 80 | 69 | 46.8 | ||||
| CK-near-3 | 4 | 7 | 33 | 81 | 80 | ||||
| CK-far | 106°35′56″N, 26°30′03″N | 1,122 | CK-far-1 | 6 | 7 | 243 | 95 | 100.7 | |
| 106°33′59″N, 26°29′39″N | 1,117 | CK-far-2 | 4 | 9 | 247 | 90 | 86.9 | ||
| 106°33′55″N, 26°31′52″N | 1,120 | CK-far-3 | 7 | 9 | 212 | 87 | 83.6 | ||
| 106°34′49″N, 26°32′33″N | 1,137 | CK-far-4 | 5 | 6 | 198 | 99 | 85.2 |
Figure 3Pearson relationship between different soil properties across disturbed and undisturbed plots. n = 22, i.e. *p < 0.1; **p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01.
Figure 4The geographical location information of the study area and distribution of sampling sites (ArcGIS Desktop. 10.3. ESRI, California, US. https://desktop.arcgis.com).