4.4 Article

Determination of thorium, uranium and potassium elemental concentrations in surface soils in Cyprus

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY
Volume 77, Issue 3, Pages 325-338

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2004.03.014

Keywords

natural radioactivity; gamma radiation; elemental concentration; potassium; thorium; uranium; HPGe detector; ophiolite; Cyprus

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A comprehensive study was conducted to determine thorium, uranium and potassium elemental concentrations in surface soils throughout the accessible area of Cyprus using high-resolution gamma-ray spectrometry. A total of 115 soil samples was collected from all over the bedrock surface of the island based on the different lithological units of the study area. The soil samples were air-dried, sieved through a fine mesh, sealed in 1000-ml plastic Marinelli beakers, and measured in the laboratory in terms of their gamma radioactivity for a counting time of 18 h each. From the measured gamma-ray spectra, elemental concentrations were determined for thorium (range from 2.5 x 10(-3) to 9.8 mug g(-1)), uranium (from 8.1 x 10(-4) to 3.2 mug g(-1)) and potassium (from 1.3 x 10(-4) to 1.9%). The arithmetic mean values (A.M. +/- S.D.) calculated from all samples are: (1.2 +/- 1.7) mug g(-1), (0.6 +/- 0.7) mug g(-1) and (0.4 +/- 0.3)%, for thorium, uranium and potassium, respectively, which are by a factor of three-six lower than the world average values of 7.4 mug g(-1) (Th), 2.8 mug g(-1) (U) and 1.3% (K) derived from all data available worldwide. The best-fitting relation between the concentrations of Th and K versus U and also of K versus Th, is essentially of linear type with a correlation coefficient of 0.93, 0.84 and 0.90, respectively. The Th/U, K/U and K/Th ratios (slopes) extracted are equal to 2.0, 2.8 x 10(3) and 1.4 x 10(3), respectively. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available