4.5 Article

Bioaccumulation of heavy metals in fish collected from the Eastern Coast of Saudi Arabia and Human Health Implications

期刊

REGIONAL STUDIES IN MARINE SCIENCE
卷 62, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.rsma.2023.102986

关键词

Heavy metals; Bioaccumulation; Health risk assessment; Eastern coast of Saudi Arabia; Fish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluates the levels of heavy metals in water and fish samples from the coast of Saudi Arabia's Arabian Gulf. The findings suggest potential risks to marine life and human health safety from heavy metal contamination. While most instances show safe conditions based on health risk assessment, there are concerns regarding arsenic and chromium.
Saudi Arabia's coast of the Arabian Gulf is seeing rapid industrial growth, which may be a source of heavy metal contamination for marine life. The present study is important for the environment's water quality and the health of the biota as well as from the standpoint of human health safety. The amount of heavy metals (As, Cu, Cr, Pb, and Cd) in water samples and fish samples taken from the area around the Ras Al Khair desalination plant have been evaluated in the current study. The close fluctuations along the studied locations can be seen in the levels of Cd (0.04-0.08 mu g/l), Pb (0.25-0.29 mu g/l), As (4.42-4.88 mu g/l l), Cu (3.47-3.74 mu g/l), and Cr (9.62-9.91 mu g/l). The three primary metals that accumulated in the examined fish samples were As, Cu, and Cr. Aethaloperca rogaa had the lowest level of As (0.17 mu g/g) while Cephalopholis hemistiktos had the highest level (1.02 mu g/g). The current analysis demonstrates that the THQ value of As is greater than one in Cephalopholis hemistiktos and lower than one in all other instances, placing it on the safe side. In most instances, the health risk assessment demonstrates that the conditions are safe. However, there are concerning circumstances in the As and Cr cases.(c) 2023 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.5
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