4.7 Article

Occurrence and ecological risk assessment of 22 emerging contaminants in the Jilin Songhua River (Northeast China)

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 25, 期 24, 页码 24003-24012

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-018-2459-3

关键词

Pharmaceutical; Person care product; Endocrine disrupting compound; Antibiotic; Estrogen; Ecological risk assessment

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21577047, 21307041]
  2. Scientific Research Project of Environmental Protection Bureau of Jilin Province [2017-15]
  3. 111 Project [B16020]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rivers may receive pharmaceuticals, personal care products, and environment estrogens, which are emerging concerns, from various sources. Understanding the fate of these emerging contaminants (ECs) from the sources to their receiving river is important for assessing their ecosystem risk. Here, the occurrence, seasonal variation, spatial distribution, and ecological risk of 22 ECs in water and sediments from the Jilin Songhua River, as well as in the effluents from the riverside Jilin wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) were investigated. Results indicated that estriol with the highest median concentration of 21.5 ng L-1 in the river water and with the highest median concentration of 481.5 ng g(-1) in the sediments, and methylparaben with the highest concentration of 29.6 +/- 2.9 ng L-1 in the WWTP effluents were the predominant contaminants. The total concentration of ECs in the river water in the dry season was about 1.5 times higher than that in the wet season. The concentrations of these ECs close to the contaminated tributary and the WWTP were relatively high. Risk assessment showed that the maximum risk quotient value of estrone was 1.07 in the river water and estriol was 2.10 in the effluents. In addition, erythromycin posed generally medium risk in the river water and WWTP effluents. It should be paid attention to the prior control of the three contaminants in the river region.

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