4.7 Article

Fates and ecological effects of current-use pesticides (CUPs) in a typical river-estuarine system of Laizhou Bay, North China

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 252, 期 -, 页码 573-579

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.05.141

关键词

Current-use pesticides; River-estuary; Fates; Distribution; Chlorpyrifos

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [41773138, U1806207, 41503111]
  2. Yantai Institute of Coastal Zone Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences [YIC Y855011024]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Current-use pesticides (CUPS) are widely applied in agriculture; however, little is known about their environmental behaviors, especially in the freshwater-seawater transitional zone. Water and sediment samples were collected in an intensively human impacted river (Xiaoqing River) from the headwaters to Laizhou Bay to investigate the distributions and environmental fates of four CUPs: trifluralin, chlorothalonil, chlorpyrifos, and dicofol. These CUPS were frequently detected in water and sediment samples. Sigma CUPs in water and sediment samples ranged from 1.20 to 100.2 ng L-1 and 6.6-2972.5 ng g(-1) dry weight (dw), respectively. Chlorpyrifos and chlorothalonil were the most abundant CUPs in water and sediment samples, respectively. Spatial distribution of CUPs in the Xiaoqing River aquatic ecosystem was mainly influenced by point sources, agricultural activities, the dilution effect by seawater, and environmental parameters. Field-based sediment water partitioning coefficients, normalized by organic carbon (log Koc), were calculated. Interestingly, temperature and salinity exhibited significant impacts on the distribution of log Koc of the four CUPs. The effect of temperature on the distribution of log Koc of the four CUPs varied between the CUPs. In most water samples, the levels of chlorpyrifos exceed the freshwater screening benchmarks. Hence, urgent control measures need to be devised and implemented. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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