4.1 Article

UNCONVENTIONAL POLYAROMATICS COMPOUNDS AND MERCURY IN THE TODOS OS SANTOS BAY, BRAZIL: RECENT ADVANCES AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND OF THEIR ROLE IN THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT

期刊

QUIMICA NOVA
卷 46, 期 6, 页码 668-682

出版社

SOC BRASILEIRA QUIMICA
DOI: 10.21577/0100-4042.20230067

关键词

unconventional polyaromatics; marine pollution; marine ecosystems; coastal zones; marine organisms

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Baia de Todos os Santos (BTS) is the second-largest Brazilian bay and an important oil producing region in Brazil. This study presents recent research on contamination by polycyclic aromatic compounds (PACs) and Hg in the BTS region, focusing on sediments, water, and biota. The study also discusses the presence of different types of PACs, such as PAHs, nitro-PAHs, oxy-PAHs, and PASHs, as well as the distribution of Hg in seawater, sediments, and biota. The findings on biomonitoring organisms, including polychaetes, ascidians, and corals, are also discussed. The study concludes with suggestions for future research.
Baia de Todos os Santos (BTS) is the second-largest Brazilian bay; it was the first oil producing region in Brazil, with three large industrial parks in its north-northeast portion. In addition, the BTS has two large ports and a population of around 3 million inhabitants distributed among 14 cities. In the present study, recent studies on contamination by polycyclic aromatic compounds (PACs) and Hg in sediments, water, and biota from the BTS region are presented and critically discussed. Among the PACs, studies evaluating the presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and their nitrated (nitro-PAHs), oxygenated derivatives (oxy-PAHs), and those containing atoms of S as a heteroatom (PASHs) are considered, as well as the element Hg distributed in seawater, sediments, and biota. Regarding biomonitoring organisms, recent results on polychaetes, ascidians, and corals are presented. Trends for future studies are presented at the end of the text.

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

4.1
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