4.7 Article

Occurrence of priority hazardous PAHs in water, suspended particulate matter, sediment and common eels (Anguilla anguilla) in the urban stretch of the River Tiber (Italy)

Journal

CHEMOSPHERE
Volume 81, Issue 11, Pages 1386-1392

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.09.027

Keywords

PAHs; River Tiber; Water; Suspended particulate matter; Sediment; European eels

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the occurrence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in water, suspended particulate matter (SPM), bed sediment and common eels (Anguilla anguilla) in the urban stretch of the River Tiber (Italy) The selected PAHs, fluoranthene. benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, belong to the EC priority list of dangerous substances. SPM was found to be the most polluted compartment, with values ranging from 1663 1 to 15472 9 ng g(-1) (Sigma(G)PAHs), followed by sediment samples, from 157 8 to 271.6 ng g(-1) and by aqueous samples, from 23 9 to 72.0 ng L-1 The distribution coefficient (K-d) showed a good correlation with particle organic carbon (OC) content, while K-oc values experimentally measured for sediment/SPM deviated from those predicted by K-ow implying that for very hydrophobic compounds. K-ow alone may not be an appropriate descriptor of all the thermodynamic forces involved in their sorption to aquatic particles Some selected PAH ratios indicated that PAHs in the River Tiber come mainly from pyrolitic sources and vehicular traffic Concentrations of individual PAHs in muscles of common eels varied from 0.8 to 7.0 ng g(-1) wet wt. and the calculated toxicity equivalent concentration (TEQ 1 8 ng g(-1) wet wt.) of total PAHs fell below the recommended screening value (SV) in US EPA guidelines, suggesting no concern for human consumption (C) 2010 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available