4.6 Article

Changes in Spectroscopic and Molecular Weight Characteristics of Dissolved Organic Matter in a River During a Storm Event

期刊

WATER AIR AND SOIL POLLUTION
卷 212, 期 1-4, 页码 395-406

出版社

SPRINGER INT PUBL AG
DOI: 10.1007/s11270-010-0353-9

关键词

Dissolved organic matter (DOM); Storm event; Fluorescence; Molecular weight; Humification index

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Changes in dissolved organic matter (DOM) characteristics were investigated during a storm event in the Kyungan River using UV-visible, fluorescence spectroscopy, resin fractionation, and size exclusion chromatography (SEC). Water samples were collected at nine sampling times to reflect a variation of the river water level. A dramatic increase was observed for chemical oxygen demand (COD) versus biochemical oxygen demand, suggesting that non-biodegradable organic components may be more contained in the organic matters driven by the storm. Specific UV absorbance values increased from 2.15 to 3.16 L/mgC-m, reaching the maximum level at the highest water level. The storm runoff resulted in the reduction of protein-like fluorescence (PLF), the increase of fulvic-like and humic-like fluorescence for the synchronous fluorescence spectra of DOM. Weight-average molecular weight (MWw) values increased from 1,100 to 1,510 Da due to the increment of high MW fractions in the SEC chromatograms. Overall changes in DOM composition may be explained by the inflow of soil-derived DOM from the upstream basins brought by the storm. The humification index (HIX) exhibited a positive correlation with MWw values, suggesting that HIX may be suggested to a prediction descriptor for DOM MW during the storm event. PLF presented a negative correlation with DOM MW, suggesting that protein-like fluorescent compounds are associated with low MW components in the river. More input of humic substances by the storm runoff appears to shift DOM into a higher MW value as revealed by a positive correlation between MWw and hydrophobic fraction.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据