4.7 Article

Assessing environmental changes in Lake Shihwa, South Korea, based on distributions and stable carbon isotopic compositions of n-alkanes

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 240, 期 -, 页码 105-115

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.04.098

关键词

Lake Shihwa; Sedimentary organic matter; n-alkanes; Stable carbon isotope; Dike construction; Tidal power plant

资金

  1. National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER)
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science and Innovation, New Zealand - South Korea [NRF-2016R1A2B3015388 (KOPRI-PN17100), NRF-2016R1E1A1A01943004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigate historical environmental changes in an artificial lake, Lake Shihwa in South Korea, based on bulk (TOC, TN, C/N ratio, delta C-13(TOC), and delta N-15(TN)) and molecular (concentrations and delta C-13 of n-alkanes) parameters, by analyzing riverbank sediments (n =12), lake surface sediments (n = 9), and lake core sediments (n = 108). Although the bulk organic parameters showed similar characteristics for all lake surface sediment samples, the distribution pattern and delta C-13 of n-alkanes revealed distinct differences between 2009 samples and 2012/2016 samples, This change of sedimentary organic matter characteristics can be attributed to operation of the tidal power plant that began in 2011, which improved lake water circulation and thus changed the lake sedimentary environment from anoxic to more oxic conditions. The vertical profiles of bulk and molecular lake sediment core records collected in 2009, especially at the site closest to the dike, showed a drastic shift around 1987, indicating that stronger anoxic sedimentary conditions prevailed after 1987. This is linked to sea dike construction in 1987, which prohibited sea-lake water exchange and thus deteriorated water quality in Lake Shihwa. We conclude that Lake Shihwa has experienced severe environmental changes due to human activities. (C) 2018 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