4.8 Article

Modeling the Dynamic Behavior of Radiocesium in Grazing Reindeer

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 56, 期 17, 页码 -

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.2c00280

关键词

dynamic modeling; cesium-137; Chernobyl contamination; deposition mapping; time series; environmental transfer; model validation

资金

  1. Research Council of Norway through its Centres of Excellence [223268/F50]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a novel dynamic model for estimating Cs-137 concentrations in reindeer meat at any given time using large data sets. The model utilizes detailed soil data, knowledge of reindeer migration, and soil-to-vegetation transfer information. The validation exercise shows promising results, suggesting that the model can be a useful tool for predicting contamination levels in reindeer meat.
Radiocesium contamination in Norwegian reindeer and the factors influencing contamination levels have been studied for more than 50 years, providing significant amounts of data. Monitoring contamination in reindeer is of utmost importance for reindeer husbandry and herders in Norway and will need to be studied for many years because of the persistent contamination levels due to the 1986 Chernobyl fallout. This paper presents a novel dynamic model that takes advantage of the large data sets that have been collected for reindeer monitoring to estimate Cs-137 in reindeer meat at any given time. The model has been validated using detailed Cs-137 data from one of the herds most affected by the fallout. The model basis includes detailed Cs-137 soil data from aerial surveys, GPS-based knowledge of reindeer migration, and local soil-to-vegetation Cs-137 transfer information. The validation exercise shows that the model satisfactorily predicts both short-and long-term changes in Cs-137 concentrations in reindeer meat and suggests that the model will be a useful tool in estimating seasonal changes and evaluating possible remedial actions in case of a future fallout event.

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

4.8
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