| Literature DB >> 36050328 |
Cang Gong1, Shunxiang Wang1, Dewei Wang2, Haichuan Lu1, Hang Dong1, Jiufen Liu3, Buqing Yan1, Liang Wang4.
Abstract
To determine the heavy metal(loid)s (HMs) contamination of agricultural soil in hotbed chives hometown of Tangchang, 788 topsoil samples were collected and analyzed for their heavy metal(loid)s concentration. The index of geo-accumulation (Igeo), pollution index (PI) and potential ecological risk index (EIi) were used to assess the degree of pollution. Correlation analysis and principal component analysis (PCA) were used to determine the sources of soil HMs. Human health risks estimated with hazard index (HI) and carcinogenic risk (CR) indices based on ingestion, inhalation and dermal exposure pathways for adults and children. The mean values of Cd, Hg, As, Pb, Cr, Cu, Ni and Zn were 0.221, 0.155, 9.76, 32.2, 91.9, 35.2, 37.1 and 108.8 mg kg-1, respectively, which did not exceed the threshold values of the risk screening value for soil contamination. The potential ecological risk of soil heavy metal(loid)s was low level and there was no significant human health risk. Based on PCA, Pb and Hg may originate from transportation and atmospheric deposition, Zn, Cr and Ni may originate from natural sources and industrial activities, and Cu and Cd may originate from agricultural activities. Overall, from the perspective of HMs content, the soil quality in this study area was at a clean level. This study provides a reference and a basis for formulating effective measures to prevent and control HMs enrichment in agricultural soils.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36050328 PMCID: PMC9436935 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-11397-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1Locations of study area and sampling sites. (Map were generated with software ArcMap10.8 http://www.esri.com/).
Statistical summary of HMs concentrations (mg kg−1) in soil, and TN, TP, TK, OM (g kg−1) and soil pH.
| Elements | Mean | S.D | Median | Min | Max | CV% | Background valuesa | Threshold valuesb | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | ||||||||
| Cd | 0.221 | 0.069 | 0.210 | 0.082 | 0.83 | 31.05 | 0.25 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.6 |
| Hg | 0.155 | 0.090 | 0.130 | 0.022 | 0.88 | 58.13 | 0.08 | 1.3 | 1.8 | 2.4 | 3.4 |
| As | 9.76 | 2.08 | 9.43 | 4.17 | 18.0 | 21.35 | 9.11 | 40 | 40 | 30 | 25 |
| Pb | 32.2 | 5.0 | 32.3 | 19.8 | 90.3 | 15.42 | 30.3 | 70 | 90 | 120 | 170 |
| Cr | 91.9 | 10.0 | 92.3 | 61.7 | 264 | 10.87 | 78 | 150 | 150 | 200 | 250 |
| Cu | 35.2 | 21.1 | 34.4 | 18.5 | 607 | 59.93 | 28.1 | 50 | 50 | 100 | 100 |
| Ni | 37.1 | 3.7 | 37.2 | 23.6 | 56.6 | 10.07 | 33.5 | 60 | 70 | 100 | 190 |
| Zn | 108.8 | 62.9 | 106.0 | 55 | 1820 | 57.80 | 82.2 | 200 | 200 | 250 | 300 |
| pH | 6.17 | 1.01 | 5.96 | 4.16 | 9.04 | 16.40 | 6.14 | – | – | – | – |
| TN | 1.33 | 0.26 | 1.30 | 0.70 | 2.40 | 19.6 | – | – | – | – | – |
| TP | 1.16 | 0.79 | 1.11 | 0.22 | 20.8 | 68.14 | – | – | – | – | – |
| TK | 23.6 | 2.4 | 24.3 | 10.3 | 28.0 | 10.15 | – | – | – | – | – |
| OM | 17.7 | 5.1 | 17.6 | 2.4 | 43.8 | 28.62 | – | – | – | – | – |
aThe background values of soil metals for Chengdu[26].
bThe risk screening values for soil contamination (GB 15618-2018) (MEEC, 2018), A: pH ≤ 5.5, B: 5.5 < pH ≤ 6.5, C: 6.5 < pH ≤ 7.5, D: pH > 7.5.
Exposure parameters, reference dose (RfD) and slope factor (SF) of HMs.
| Parameters | Value |
|---|---|
| IngR (ingestion rate of soil) (mg day−1) | 100 (adults) and 200 (children) |
| InhR (inhalation rate) (m3 day−1) | 14.5 (adults) and 7.5 (children) |
| EF (exposure frequency) (day year−1) | 350 |
| ED (exposure duration) (year) | 25 (adults) and 6 (children) |
| BW (average body weight) (kg) | 56.8 (adults) and 15.9 (children) |
| AT (average exposure time) (days) | ED × 365 (non-carcinogenic risk) and 26,280 (carcinogenic risk) |
| SA (surface area of skin) (cm2) | 5700 (adults) and 2800 (children) |
| AF (skin adherence factor) (mg (cm2 h)−1) | 0.2 |
| PEF (Emission factor) (m3 kg−1) | 1.36 × 109 |
| ABS (dermal absorption factor) (unitless) | 0.001 |
| As (3.00 × 10−4), Cd (1.00 × 10−3), Cr (3.00 × 10−3), Cu (4.00 × 10−2), Hg (3.00 × 10−4), Ni (2.00 × 10−2), Pb (3.50 × 10−4) and Zn (3 × 10−1) | |
| As (1.23 × 10−4), Cd (2.5 × 10−5), Cr (6 × 10−5), Cu (1.20 × 10−2), Hg (2.1 × 10−5), Ni (5.40 × 10−3), Pb (5.25 × 10−5) and Zn (6 × 10−2) | |
| As (3.0 × 10−4), Cd (1.00 × 10−5), Cr (2.86 × 10−5), Cu (4.02 × 10−2), Hg (8.57 × 10−5), Ni (2.06 × 10−3), Pb (3.52 × 10−5) and Zn (3.0 × 10−1) | |
| As (1.50 × 100), Cd (6.10 × 100), Cr (5 × 10−1) and Pb (8.5 × 10−3) | |
| As (1.50 × 100) and Cd (6.10 × 100) | |
| As (1.51 × 101), Cd (6.30 × 100), Cr (4.20 × 101), Ni (8.40 × 10−1) and Pb (4.20 × 10−2) |
Figure 2Indexes of geo-accumulation, pollution indexes and potential ecological risk indexes of HMs in study aera. Circles at the top and bottom of box plots correspond to the maximum and minimum values, respectively. The square in the box plot is the average value. Horizontal lines at the top, middle, and bottom of the box plot correspond to 75% percentile, median, and 25% percentile, respectively.
Results of Pearson’s correlation analysis of HMs.
| Cu | Pb | Zn | Cr | Ni | Cd | As | Hg | TP | TK | TN | OM | pH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cu | 1 | ||||||||||||
| Pb | 0.051 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Zn | 0.033 | 0.076* | 1 | ||||||||||
| Cr | − 0.004 | 0.219** | 0.213** | 1 | |||||||||
| Ni | 0.250** | 0.290** | 0.314** | 0.454** | 1 | ||||||||
| Cd | 0.386** | 0.148** | 0.069 | 0.019 | 0.039 | 1 | |||||||
| As | − 0.053 | − 0.072* | − 0.072* | − 0.014 | 0.086* | − 0.312** | 1 | ||||||
| Hg | 0.091* | 0.602** | 0.087* | 0.087* | 0.191** | 0.161** | − 0.129** | 1 | |||||
| TP | 0.882** | − 0.010 | 0.007 | − 0.069 | 0.051 | 0.462** | − 0.199** | 0.052 | 1 | ||||
| TK | − 0.043 | 0.197** | 0.038 | 0.370** | 0.585** | − 0.076* | − 0.140** | 0.156** | − 0.064 | 1 | |||
| TN | 0.023 | 0.146** | 0.010 | 0.046 | − 0.016 | 0.103** | − 0.137** | 0.123** | 0.038 | 0.035 | 1 | ||
| OM | 0.143** | 0.364** | 0.021 | 0.114** | − 0.033 | 0.599** | − 0.482** | 0.236** | 0.286** | 0.002 | 0.245** | 1 | |
| pH | 0.032 | − 0.338** | 0.004 | − 0.129** | − 0.103** | 0.272** | 0.045 | − 0.028 | − 0.025 | − 0.182** | − 0.104** | − 0.138** | 1 |
*Shows significant correlation at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**Shows significant correlation at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Results of the principal component analysis for HMs.
| Component | Cu | Pb | Zn | Cr | Ni | Cd | As | Hg | Initial eigenvalues | Explained variance (%) | Explained of cumulative variance (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC-1 | 0.011 | − 0.074 | 0.139 | 0.232 | 0.126 | − 0.079 | 1.651 | 20.637 | 20.637 | ||
| PC-2 | 0.049 | 0.162 | − 0.013 | − 0.017 | 0.032 | 1.636 | 20.446 | 41.082 | |||
| PC-3 | 0.029 | − 0.034 | − 0.054 | 0.287 | − 0.034 | 0.061 | 1.365 | 17.063 | 58.145 | ||
| PC-4 | 0.066 | − 0.011 | − 0.264 | 0.049 | 0.277 | − 0.514 | − 0.103 | 1.222 | 15.271 | 73.416 |
Significant values are in bold.
Statistics analysis for non-carcinogenic risk index and carcinogenic risk index of HMs.
| Cd | Hg | As | Pb | Cr | Cu | Ni | Zn | THI | TCR | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HQing | Adults | 3.74E−04 | 8.70E−04 | 5.49E−02 | 1.56E−02 | 5.17E−02 | 1.48E−03 | 3.13E−03 | 6.12E−04 | 1.29E−01 | – |
| Children | 2.67E−03 | 6.22E−03 | 3.93E−01 | 1.11E−01 | 3.70E−01 | 1.06E−02 | 2.24E−02 | 4.37E−03 | 9.19E−01 | – | |
| HQinh | Adults | 3.98E−06 | 3.25E−07 | 5.86E−06 | 1.65E−04 | 5.78E−04 | 1.58E−07 | 3.24E−06 | 6.53E−08 | 7.57E−04 | – |
| Children | 7.36E−06 | 6.00E−07 | 1.08E−05 | 3.05E−04 | 1.07E−03 | 2.91E−07 | 5.99E−06 | 1.21E−07 | 1.40E−03 | – | |
| HQderm | Adults | 1.70E−04 | 1.42E−04 | 1.53E−03 | 1.18E−02 | 2.95E−02 | 5.64E−05 | 1.32E−04 | 3.49E−05 | 4.34E−02 | – |
| Children | 2.99E−04 | 2.49E−04 | 2.68E−03 | 2.07E−02 | 5.17E−02 | 9.90E−05 | 2.32E−04 | 6.12E−05 | 7.61E−02 | – | |
| THI | Adults | 5.48E−04 | 1.01E−03 | 5.65E−02 | 2.75E−02 | 8.18E−02 | 1.54E−03 | 3.27E−03 | 6.47E−04 | 1.73E−01 | – |
| Children | 2.98E−03 | 6.46E−03 | 3.95E−01 | 1.32E−01 | 4.22E−01 | 1.07E−02 | 2.26E−02 | 4.43E−03 | 9.97E−01 | – | |
| CRing | Adults | 7.91E−07 | 8.59E−06 | 1.61E−07 | 2.69E−05 | – | – | – | – | – | 3.65E−05 |
| Children | 1.36E−06 | 1.47E−05 | 2.75E−07 | 4.62E−05 | – | – | – | – | – | 6.25E−05 | |
| CRinh | Adults | 8.71E−11 | 9.21E−09 | 8.46E−11 | 2.41E−07 | 1.95E−09 | – | – | – | – | 2.53E−07 |
| Children | 3.86E−11 | 4.09E−09 | 3.75E−11 | 1.07E−07 | 8.63E−10 | – | – | – | – | 1.12E−07 | |
| CRderm | Adults | 9.01E−09 | 9.79E−08 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 1.07E−07 |
| Children | 3.80E−09 | 4.12E−08 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 4.50E−08 | |
| CR | Adults | 8.00E−07 | 8.69E−06 | 1.61E−07 | 2.72E−05 | 1.95E−09 | – | – | – | – | 3.68E−05 |
| Children | 1.36E−06 | 1.48E−05 | 2.76E−07 | 4.63E−05 | 8.63E−10 | – | – | – | – | 6.27E−05 |
Figure 3Contribution of different exposure pathways and various HMs to hazard index. A stand for HI of adults and B for HI of children by contribution of different exposure pathways, C stand for HI of adults and D for HI of children by contribution of various HMs.