4.5 Article

Spatial distribution and metal contamination in the coastal sediments of Al-Khafji area, Arabian Gulf, Saudi Arabia

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10661-017-6352-1

关键词

Spatial distribution; Metal contamination; Coastal sediments; Al-Khafji area; Arabian Gulf; Saudi Arabia

资金

  1. Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University [NFG-15-03-12]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To document the spatial distribution and metal contamination in the coastal sediments of the Al-Khafji area in the northern part of the Saudi Arabian Gulf, 27 samples were collected for Al, V, Cr, Mn, Cu, Zn, Cd, Pb, Hg, Sr, As, Fe, Co, and Ni analysis using inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometer (ICP-MS). The results revealed the following descending order of the metal concentrations: Sr > Fe > Al > As > Mn > Ni > V > Zn > Cr > Cu > Pb > Co > Hg > Cd. Average levels of enrichment factor of Sr, As, Hg, Cd, Ni, V, Cu, Co, and Pb were higher than 2 (218.10, 128.50, 80.94, 41.50, 12.31, 5.66, 2.95, 2.90, and 2.85, respectively) and that means the anthropogenic sources of these metals, while Al, Zn, Cr and Mn have enrichment factor less than 2, which implies natural sources. Average values of Sr, Hg, Cd, Cr, Ni, and As in the coastal sediments of Al-Khafji area were mostly higher than the values recorded from the background shale and earth crust and from those results along coasts of the Caspian Sea and the Mediterranean Sea. The highest levels of Cu in the northern part of the studied coastline might be due to Al-Khafji desalination plant, while levels of Al, Ni, Cr, Fe, Mn, Pb, and Zn in the central part may be a result of landfilling and industrial sewage. The highest levels of As, Cd, Co, Cu, Hg, and V in the southern part seem to be due to oil pollutants from Khafji Joint Operations (KJO). The higher values of Sr in the studied sediments in general and particularly in locality 7 could relate to the hypersalinity and aragonitic composition of the scleractinian corals abundant in that area.

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