4.7 Article

Occurrence and Distribution of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) from Sele River, Southern Italy: Analysis of Polychlorinated Biphenyls and Organochlorine Pesticides in a Water-Sediment System

期刊

TOXICS
卷 10, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/toxics10110662

关键词

persistent organic pollutants; Sele river; toxicity equivalent; risk assessment; Principal Component Analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The concentrations, possible sources, and ecological risk of PCBs and OCPs in Sele River were studied. The river was found to potentially contaminate the Tyrrhenian Sea, with higher concentrations of pollutants in sediment samples indicating historical contamination. The Sele River and its estuary were found to be at a potential risk.
The concentrations, possible sources, and ecological risk of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) were studied by analyzing water column (DP), suspended particulate matter (SPM) and sediment samples from 10 sites on the Sele River. Total PCBs concentration ranged from 2.94 to 54.4 ng/L and 5.01 to 79.3 ng/g in the seawater and sediment samples, with OCPs concentration in the range of 0.51 to 8.76 ng/L and 0.50 to 10.2 ng/g, respectively. Pollutants loads in the seaside were measured in approximately 89.7 kg/year (73.2 kg/year of PCBs and 16.5 kg/year of OCPs), indicating that the watercourse could be an important cause of contamination to the Tyrrhenian Sea. Statistical analysis indicates that all polychlorinated biphenyls analytes are more probable to derive from surface runoff than an atmospheric deposition. The results explain that higher concentrations of these pollutants were built in sediment samples rather than in the other two phases, which are evidence of historical loads of PCBs and OCPs contaminants. The Sediment Quality Guidelines (SQGs), the Ecological Risk Index (ERI) and the Risk Quotient (RQ) show that the Sele river and its estuary would reputedly be a zone possibly at risk.

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