4.7 Article

Geochemistry of large benthic foraminifera Amphisorus hemprichii as a high-resolution proxy for lead pollution in coastal environments

期刊

MARINE POLLUTION BULLETIN
卷 162, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111918

关键词

Coastal lead pollution; Large benthic foraminifera; Amphisorus hemprichii; LA-ICPMS; Lead geochemistry; Biogeochemical-monitoring

资金

  1. Australian Research Council (ARC) Laureate Fellowship [LF120100049]
  2. ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies [CE140100020]
  3. UWA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study explores the use of Amphisorus hemprichii as a biogeochemical archive for monitoring lead pollution in coastal waters. Through laboratory experiments, it was found that the lead concentration in cultured foraminifera tests is proportional to seawater lead concentration, providing a method for quantitatively monitoring anthropogenic lead pollution in coastal waters.
Anthropogenic lead (Pb) contamination resulting from the rapid growth of industrialization in coastal environments poses significant challenges. In this study, we report a novel approach utilising the large benthic foraminifera Amphisorus hemprichii as a biogeochemical archive for monitoring Pb pollution in tropical to warm-temperate coastal waters. Live juvenile specimens of A. hemprichii were cultured in the laboratory for 16 weeks with a range of seawater Pb concentrations. Lead uptake in both newly grown and pre-existing chambers of individual specimens was characterised using the microanalytical technique, Laser ablation-ICP mass spectrometry. We found that Pb concentration in the tests of cultured foraminifera in the laboratory is proportional to seawater [Pb] with the lead partition coefficient (K-D(pb)) of 8.37 +/- 0.3. This calibration together with a new biomineralisation model now enables A. hemprichii to be utilised as a naturally occurring bio-archive to quantitatively monitor anthropogenic Pb pollution in coastal waters.

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