| Literature DB >> 36011929 |
Yongjiang Zhang1,2, Xian Zhou3, Weibin Ma2, Deliang Yin3, Yongmin Wang2, Cheng Zhang2, Dingyong Wang2.
Abstract
Manganese (Mn)-related activities would affect the mercury (Hg) cycling in farmlands, whereas this was not well understood. Here, one of the largest Mn ores in China was selected to study the effects of Mn-related activities on the accumulation and distribution of total Hg (THg) and methylmercury (MeHg) in farmland soils. The soil THg concentrations in the mining area were 0.56 ± 0.45, 0.56 ± 0.45, 0.53 ± 0.44, and 0.50 ± 0.46 mg kg-1 in the 0-10, 10-20, 20-30, and 30-40 cm layers, respectively, while they were increased to 0.75 ± 0.75, 0.72 ± 0.60, 0.62 ± 0.46, and 0.52 ± 0.38 mg kg-1 in the smelting area. Similarly, the soil MeHg concentrations in the smelting area were also elevated by 1.04-1.34 times as compared to those in the mining area. Concentrations of THg (0.59 ± 0.50 mg kg-1) and MeHg (0.64 ± 0.82 μg kg-1) in soils were higher than the regional background value but lower than in vicinal Hg-mining areas, while they were largely elevated at the intersection of two rivers in the smelting area. Significant positive Mn-THg relationship (p < 0.01) and negative Mn-MeHg relationship (p < 0.01) favored the conclusion that soil Mn could promote Hg accumulation while inhibiting MeHg production. Approximately 70% of soil Hg was distributed in the residual phase, and the environmental hazard was not elevated according to a geochemical model. Overall, mining and smelting activities of Mn ores have resulted in obvious and distinct effects on the accumulation and methylation of Hg in farmland soils, but the environmental hazards are currently manageable.Entities:
Keywords: environmental hazard; influencing factors; manganese-related activities; mercury; methylmercury; soil
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36011929 PMCID: PMC9408302 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191610288
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Sampling sites in the Mn mining and smelting areas.
Procedure of an optimized Tessier’s sequential chemical extraction method.
| Procedure of Modified Tessier Method | Reagent | The Specific Methods |
|---|---|---|
| The water soluble and exchangeable (Hg-EX) | 1mol/L Mg(NO3)2 (HNO3 regulates pH = 7.0) | Accurately weighing 2.0 g soil samples, adding16 mL extractant, shaking at room temperature for1h, centrifugal 20 min (3500 r/min), supernatant through 0.45 μm microporous membrane, analysis. The residue was washed twice with 8ml ultrapure water. |
| The bound to carbonate (Hg-CAR) | 1mol/L NaAc (CH3COOH regulates pH = 5.0) | After the first step, 16 mL extract was added to the residue, shaking at room temperature for 5 h, centrifuged for 20 min, the supernatant was analyzed. The residue was washed twice with 8 mL ultrapure water. |
| The bound to Fe/Mn oxides of low crystallinity (Hg-OX) | 0.4mol/LNH2OH·HCl (soluble in 20%HAc( | After treatment in step 2, add 40 mL extract, 96 °C water bath 6 h, centrifugal 20 min, take supernatant analysis. The residue was washed twice with 8 mL ultrapure water. |
| The bound to organic matter (Hg-OM) | H2O2 (HNO3 regulates pH = 2.0) | Residue after step 3 treatment, add 16 mL extract, 80 °C water bath 2 h, add 6 mL extract, 80 °C water bath 3h, centrifugal 20 min, take supernatant analysis. The residue was washed twice with 8 mL ultrapure water. |
| The residual (Hg-RES) | Aqua regia (HNO3:HCl = 1:3) | The residue was treated by step 4, adding 20 mL extractant, 95 °C water bath10min, adding 1.0 mL BrCl and 95 °C water bath 30 min again. |
Properties and components in soils of different profiles in the manganese mining and smelting areas.
| Sampling Points | pH | SOM | CEC | Mn | Fe | S | Se | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (g kg–1) | (cmol+ kg–1) | (mg kg–1) | (mg kg–1) | (mg kg–1) | (mg kg–1) | |||
| Mining area | Maximum value | 7.57 | 64.85 | 17.35 | 7535.80 | 42,335.40 | 709.43 | 2.35 |
| Minimum value | 4.53 | 11.72 | 5.40 | 121.40 | 14,357.10 | 100.72 | 0.22 | |
| Average value | 5.97 | 29.69 | 10.50 | 1613.69 | 27,458.69 | 304.83 | 0.85 | |
| Standard deviation | 0.81 | 11.57 | 3.51 | 1879.65 | 6088.50 | 126.72 | 0.50 | |
| Smelting area | Maximum value | 7.44 | 47.20 | 25.56 | 10316.60 | 53,781.70 | 933.24 | 1.37 |
| Minimum value | 4.61 | 10.18 | 7.21 | 175.00 | 15,082.00 | 106.89 | 0.34 | |
| Average value | 6.35 | 28.84 | 12.13 | 1609.11 | 28,572.99 | 289.41 | 0.80 | |
| Standard deviation | 0.63 | 9.93 | 3.23 | 2415.33 | 9229.10 | 149.64 | 0.23 | |
| Mining area | Maximum value | 7.93 | 43.79 | 16.92 | 8009.39 | 42,148.71 | 786.91 | 2.57 |
| Minimum value | 4.33 | 13.94 | 3.60 | 85.16 | 14,161.04 | 111.64 | 0.26 | |
| Average value | 5.96 | 25.18 | 10.04 | 1682.66 | 27,877.52 | 296.15 | 0.82 | |
| Standard deviation | 0.89 | 6.81 | 3.21 | 1962.86 | 6526.59 | 141.38 | 0.43 | |
| Smelting area | Maximum value | 7.67 | 55.94 | 24.30 | 10883.99 | 55,503.22 | 781.91 | 1.95 |
| Minimum value | 4.54 | 10.48 | 6.54 | 193.28 | 14,716.25 | 88.33 | 0.46 | |
| Average value | 6.32 | 27.34 | 11.54 | 1508.11 | 28,694.20 | 275.10 | 0.80 | |
| Standard deviation | 0.72 | 9.70 | 3.26 | 2241.01 | 9486.01 | 134.25 | 0.26 | |
| Mining area | Maximum value | 7.88 | 37.60 | 15.96 | 9625.27 | 46,274.67 | 432.42 | 3.02 |
| Minimum value | 4.16 | 4.53 | 4.11 | 135.33 | 14,075.81 | 20.08 | 0.24 | |
| Average value | 5.93 | 20.95 | 9.76 | 1591.87 | 28,911.75 | 257.38 | 0.81 | |
| Standard deviation | 0.96 | 7.65 | 3.04 | 2007.18 | 6698.66 | 79.83 | 0.54 | |
| Smelting area | Maximum value | 7.83 | 55.39 | 15.82 | 9259.29 | 63,838.91 | 497.77 | 1.98 |
| Minimum value | 4.15 | 6.10 | 6.32 | 239.19 | 15,324.93 | 31.52 | 0.27 | |
| Average value | 6.56 | 22.14 | 11.08 | 1197.41 | 29,021.45 | 242.43 | 0.74 | |
| Standard deviation | 0.65 | 9.62 | 2.34 | 1572.37 | 9925.21 | 105.46 | 0.34 | |
| Mining area | Maximum value | 7.81 | 35.47 | 17.27 | 10858.12 | 49,717.83 | 858.71 | 1.91 |
| Minimum value | 4.18 | 5.53 | 3.37 | 106.05 | 15,132.86 | 31.26 | 0.17 | |
| Average value | 6.17 | 16.49 | 9.59 | 2019.54 | 30,971.28 | 228.46 | 0.64 | |
| Standard deviation | 0.85 | 7.71 | 3.22 | 2620.25 | 7377.17 | 135.62 | 0.35 | |
| Smelting area | Maximum value | 7.89 | 55.80 | 29.89 | 7702.29 | 71,869.28 | 353.79 | 1.26 |
| Minimum value | 4.24 | 2.70 | 6.52 | 210.48 | 12,082.49 | 14.04 | 0.33 | |
| Average value | 6.72 | 17.33 | 10.89 | 1115.55 | 31,531.45 | 189.73 | 0.61 | |
| Standard deviation | 0.64 | 10.36 | 3.46 | 1231.52 | 12,662.92 | 96.66 | 0.23 | |
Figure 2Spatial distribution of total Hg in different soil profiles in the farmlands at mining and smelting areas (A): 0–10 cm, (B): 10–20 cm, (C): 20–30 cm, and (D): 30–40 cm.
Figure 3Distribution of total Hg in soil in different profiles (A) and land-used styles (B).
Figure 4Spatial distribution of MeHg in different soil profiles in the farmlands at mining and smelting areas (A): 0–10 cm, (B): 10–20 cm, (C): 20–30 cm, and (D): 30–40 cm).
Figure 5Distribution of MeHg in soil in different profiles (A) and land-used styles (B).
Figure 6Correlation between Hg and soil physical and chemical properties in mining (A) and smelting areas (B).
Figure 7Geochemical fractionation of Hg in soil in the mining and smelting areas (A) and potential hazard of soil Hg based on RAC and RSP models (B).