4.7 Article

Some toxic metals (Al, As, Mo, Hg) from cow's milk raised in a possibly contaminated area by different sources

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 26, Issue 28, Pages 28909-28918

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-06036-7

Keywords

Heavy metals; Bovine milk; Environmental contamination; Mining; Caudal River

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Milk can be considered as an indicator of the degree of environmental contamination of the place where it is produced and this is especially important when assessing its content in toxic metals. Therefore, 36 bovine milk samples from 7 farms with a semi-extensive grazing system were analysed, located in Asturias (Spain), in an area with high probability of being highly contaminated due to a mining zone, with important industrial activity and near high-density highway traffic. The samples were lyophilised to achieve total dehydration, further analysed using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). The metals titrated were aluminium (Al), arsenic (As), molybdenum (Mo) and mercury (Hg) in the lyophilised samples and subsequently extrapolated their values to whole milk. All samples analysed showed levels of Al and Mo above the limit of detection, with mean values of Al of 140.89 +/- 157.07 in liquid milk and 1065.76 +/- 1073.45 in lyophilised milk and Mo of 20.72 +/- 14.61 mu g/kg and 152.26 +/- 96.82 mu g/kg in whole and lyophilised milk. Only As was detected in four samples with mean values of 18.45 +/- 6.89 and 166.45 +/- 42.30 mu g/kg in liquid and lyophilised milk, respectively, and no Hg was found in any of them. In no case do the values found indicate a significant hazard to the population and are in agreement with those found in other investigations. Although the various anthropogenic activities of the area (industrial, mining, traffic density) could, a priori, indicate a possibly contaminated area.

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