4.7 Article

Characteristics of chlorinated and brominated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the Pearl River Estuary

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 739, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139774

Keywords

Halogenated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; Suspended particular matter; Source; Spatial distribution; Pearl River Estuary

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21677183, 21707176, 21625703]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China [2017A030310389]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The spatial distribution of halogenated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (H-PAHs) (8 chlorinated PAHs (CIPAHs) and 9 brominated PAHs (Br-PAHs)), in the Pearl River Estuary (PRE) was investigated. The total concentrations of 17H-PAHs in sediment samples were ranged from 1.4 ng g(-1) to 40.9 ng g(-1) with an average concentration of 14.7 ng g(-1). The average H-PAH concentration in the suspended particulate matters (SPMs) (475.6 ng g(-1)) was 30 times higher than that in the sediments (14.7 ng g(-1)), and H-PAHs were rarely detected in the aqueous phase. The dominant H-PAHs in sediments were 9,10-dichloroanthracene (31.2%) and 9-chlorophenanthrene (32.0%); 2/9-chlorofluorene (27.4%) was prominent in surface SPMs, while no significant dominant congeners were found in bottom SPMs. Principal component analysis showed that the congener profiles of H-PAHs in sediments were different from those of SPMs especially for surface SPM samples which might be caused by point source discharges of H-PAHs from the coast of the PRE. In general, riverine inputs were the major source of H-PAHs in the PRE, and SPMs were important carriers for transporting H-PAHs. Diagnostic analyses showed that the H-PAHs might originate from waste incineration and automobile emissions in the Pearl River Delta (PRD). (C) 2020 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