4.7 Article

Aliphatic and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the Xihe River, an urban river in China's Shenyang City: Distribution and risk assessment

Journal

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Volume 186, Issue 2-3, Pages 1193-1199

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.11.122

Keywords

Aliphatic hydrocarbons; Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; Xihe River; River sediments; Toxic equivalent (TEQ)

Funding

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2004CB418502]
  2. State Key Laboratory of Water Environment Simulation [08ESPCT-Z]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2009SD-19]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The characteristics of petroleum hydrocarbons and the risks they pose to the ecosystem were studied in the Xihe River, which is an urban river located in Shenyang, China. High levels of aliphatic hydrocarbons (AHc) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were observed in the river due to the discharge of wastewater from industrial and municipal facilities for a long period of time. High-molecular-weight hydrocarbons, including unresolved complex mixtures (UCM) of n-alkanes between n-C16 and n-C32 and of PAHs with four to six rings, were the dominant hydrocarbons in the river, particularly in suspended particulate matter (SPM) and sediments. The AHc was mainly from petrogenic sources, whereas PAHs was from both pyrolytic and petrogenic source inputs. Our results suggest that there is a high risk of toxicity for the soils and groundwater of the study area. The overall toxicity in the sediments can be described using the toxic equivalent (TEQ) of dibenzo[a,h]anthracene (DBA) based on benzo(a)pyrene (TEQ(BaP)) and dioxins (TEQ(TCDD)) toxic equivalent concentrations. The TEQ values for benzo(a)pyrene (TEQ(BaP)) and dioxins (TEQ(TCDD)) presented a consistent assessment of sediment PAHs. Crown Copyright (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available