4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Arsenic, chromium, molybdenum, and selenium: Geochemical fractions and potential mobilization in riverine soil profiles originating from Germany and Egypt

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 180, 期 -, 页码 553-563

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.04.054

关键词

Toxic elements; Sequential extraction; Risk assessment; Floodplain soils; Soil origin

资金

  1. German Alexander von Humboldt Foundation [3.4 - EGY - 1185373 - GF-E]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The fractionation and potential mobilization of As, Cr, Mo, and Se in four floodplain soil profiles collected along the Nile (Egypt) and Wupper (Germany) Rivers were assessed using the BCR sequential extraction procedure. The concentrations of total and the geochemical fractions (acid soluble (F1), reducible (F2), oxidizable (F3), and residual (F4) fraction) of the elements were determined. The Wupper soils had the highest total concentrations (mg kg(-1)) of As (378) and Cr (2,797) while the Nile soils contained the highest total Mo (12) and Se (42). The residual fraction of As, Cr, Mo, and Se was dominant in the Nile soils suggesting the geogenic source of the elements in these soils. The residual fraction of As and Mo and the oxidizable fraction of Cr and Se were dominant in the Wupper soils. Among the non-residual fractions (potential mobile fractions; PMF = Sigma F1-F3), the oxidizable fraction was dominant for Cr, Mo, and Se in the Nile soils and for Mo in the Wupper soils, while the reducible fraction was dominant for As in both soils. The PMF of As, Cr, and Se was higher in the Wupper than in the Nile soils which might reflect the anthropogenic sources of these elements in the Wupper soils, while the opposite was the case for the PMF of Mo. The high PMF of Se (87%), Cr (87%), and As (21%) in the Wupper soils suggested that a release of these toxic elements may happen which increase the potential environmental risks in the anthro-pogenically polluted soils. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.7
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