高级搜索

风险评价代码法对农田土壤重金属生态风险的评价

,  , 

downloadPDF

上一篇

下一篇

陆泗进, 王业耀, 何立环. 风险评价代码法对农田土壤重金属生态风险的评价[J]. 环境化学, 2014, 33(11): 1857-1863. doi: 10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2014.11.021
引用本文: 陆泗进, 王业耀, 何立环. 风险评价代码法对农田土壤重金属生态风险的评价[J]. 环境化学, 2014, 33(11): 1857-1863. doi: 10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2014.11.021
shu
LU Sijin, WANG Yeyao, HE Lihuan. Ecological risk of heavy metals in agricultral soils assessed by risk assessment code[J]. Environmental Chemistry, 2014, 33(11): 1857-1863. doi: 10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2014.11.021
Citation: LU Sijin, WANG Yeyao, HE Lihuan. Ecological risk of heavy metals in agricultral soils assessed by risk assessment code[J]. Environmental Chemistry, 2014, 33(11): 1857-1863. doi: 10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2014.11.021
shu

风险评价代码法对农田土壤重金属生态风险的评价

  • 1.

    中国环境监测总站, 北京, 100012

  • 基金项目:

    中国工程院重大咨询项目"中国食品安全现状、问题及对策战略研究"课题资助.

Ecological risk of heavy metals in agricultral soils assessed by risk assessment code

  • 1.

    China National Environmental Monitoring Centre, Beijing, 100012, China

  • Fund Project:

  • 摘要: 为揭示矿区周边农田土壤中重金属分布特征及其潜在生态风险,于2013年在云南省某铅锌矿周边的农田土壤共布设68个采样点,分析土壤中Cd、Hg、As、Pb、Cr、Cu和Zn的含量及污染程度,并采用改进的BCR法测定了各重金属形态分布特征,在此基础上运用风险评价代码法评价了重金属的潜在风险程度.结果表明,7种重金属都存在不同程度的超标,其中超标最严重的是Cd和Zn,超标率分别达到92.6%和75%.7种重金属化学形态也不尽相同:在重金属有效态中,Cd的水溶态和可提取态较高(平均值达到31.2%);Pb、Cu和Zn可还原态、可氧化态这两部分含量较高,两部分之和的平均值分别可达到27.9%、30%和29.2%;Hg、As和Cr的残渣态含量较高,平均值分别为90.4%、72.9%和76.8%.风险评价代码评价结果表明,54.4%的样点Cd为高生态风险,45.6%的样点Cd为中度生态风险;100%的样点Zn为中度生态风险;Cu有41.2%的点位属于低生态风险,58.8%的点位属于中度生态风险;As和Pb主要以低生态风险为主(所占比例分别为92.6%和91.8%);Hg主要以无生态风险为主(所占97.1%).综上,该矿区周边农田土壤受到了严重的重金属污染,其中土壤中Cd的生态风险最高,同时,Zn和Cu的生态风险也不容忽视.
    Abstract: In order to investigate the distribution characteristics of heavy metals in agricultural soil around Pb-Zn mine area, soil samples at 68 sites were collected in 2013 in Yunnan Province, China. Contents of heavy metals (Cd,Hg,As,Pb,Cr,Cu and Zn) were measured. The modified BCR sequential extraction method was applied to evaluate the chemical speciation of these heavy metals. The potential ecological risks of heavy metals were then evaluated by risk assessment code. The experimental data indicate that the soil was heavily polluted by heavy metals, especially by Cd and Zn (92.6% and 75%). The chemical speciation analysis of heavy metal showed the available content of Cd mainly existed in exchangeable form (31.2%). The available content of Pb, Cu and Zn were distributed mainly in acid extractable fractions and Fe/Mn oxide fractions (27.9%, 30% and 27.2%), and Hg, As, Cr was mainly associated with residual fraction (90.4%, 72.9% and 76.8%). The results of risk assessment code showed Cd was medium and high risk (45.6% and 54.4%), Zn was medium risk (100%), Cu was low and medium risk (41.2% and 58.8%), Hg was mainly no risk (97.1%), As and Pb was mainly low risk (92.6% and 91.8%). All the results indicated that the studied area was heavily polluted by heavy metals. The potential ecological risk of Cd was at very high level, while that of Zn and Cu was at a high level.
  • 加载中
  • [1] 黄奎贤,覃柳妹,吴少珍,等.广西河池市重金属污染现状分析与治理对策[J].广西科学院学报,2012,28(4):320-324
    [2] 房辉,曹敏.云南会泽废弃铅锌矿重金属污染评价[J].生态学杂志,2009,28(7):1277-1283
    [3] 吴攀,刘丛强,张国平,等.黔西北炼锌地区河流重金属污染特征[J].农业环境保护,2002,2(15):443-446
    [4] 翟丽梅,陈同斌,廖晓勇.广西环江铅锌矿尾砂坝坍塌对农田土壤的污染及其特征[J].环境科学学报,2008,6(28):132-137
    [5] 董亚辉,戴全厚,邓伊晗,等.不同类型铅锌矿废弃地重金属的分布特征及污染评价[J].贵州农业科学,2013,41(5):109-112
    [6] 郑玉歆.土壤污染问题边缘化状态亟待改变[J].学习与实践,2013,1:47-57
    [7] 郑喜坤,鲁安怀,高翔,等.土壤中重金属污染现状与防治方法[J].土壤与环境,2002,11(1):79-84
    [8] 陈怀满.土壤-植物系统中的重金属污染[M].北京:科学出版社,1996:27-28
    [9] 曾希柏,徐建明,黄巧云,等.中国农田重金属问题的若干思考[J].土壤学报,2013,50(1):186-194
    [10] 房辉,曹敏.云南会泽废弃铅锌矿重金属污染评价[J].生态学杂志,2009,28(7):1277-1283
    [11] 王小庆,马义兵,黄占斌,等.痕量金属元素土壤环境质量基准研究进展[J].土壤通报,2013,44(2):505-512.
    [12] 刘敬勇,孙水裕,许燕滨,等.广州城市污泥中重金属的存在特征及其农用生态风险评价[J].环境科学学报,2009, 12(29):2545-2556
    [13] 曹会聪,王金达,张学林.吉林黑土中Cd、Pb、As 的空间分布及潜在生态风险[J].中国环境科学,2007,27(1):89-92
    [14] 唐庆丽,程金平,高昊旻,等.上海市典型疏浚泥重金属生态风险评价[J].环境科学,2013,34(4):1340-1344
    [15] 邵学新,吴明,蒋科毅.西溪湿地土壤重金属分布特征及其生态风险评价[J].湿地科学,2005,5(3):253-259
    [16] 丁海霞, 南忠仁, 刘晓文,等.金昌市郊农田土壤重金属的污染特征[J].农业环境科学学报,2008,27(6):2183-2188
    [17] Hakanson L. An ecological risk index for aquatic pollution control. A sediment logical approach[J]. Water Research,1980, 14(8):975-1001
    [18] 甘国娟,刘伟,邱亚群, 等.湘中某冶炼区农田土壤重金属污染及生态风险评价[J].环境化学,2013,32(1):132-138
    [19] 韩君, 徐应明, 温兆飞, 等.重庆某废弃电镀工业园农田土壤重金属污染调查与生态风险评价[J]. 环境化学,2014,33(3):432-439
    [20] 韩春梅,王林山,巩宗强,等.土壤中重金属形态分析及其环境学意义[J].生态学杂志,2005,24 (12):1499-1502
    [21] 章海波,骆永明,赵其国,等.香港土壤研究 BCR提取法研究重金属的形态及其潜在环境风险[J].土壤学报,47(5):865-871
    [22] Singh K P,Mohan D, Singh V K,et al. Studies on distribution and fractionation of heavy metals in Gomti river sediments-A tributary of the Ganges, India[J]. Journal of Hydrology,2005,312:14-27
    [23] Guo W H,Liu X B, Liu Z G,et al. Pollution and potential ecological risk evaluation of heavy metals in the sediments around Dongjiang harbor, Tianjin[J]. Procedia Environmental Science,2010,2:729-736
    [24] 宣昊,滕彦国,倪师军.基于地球化学基线的土壤重金属污染潜在生态风险评价[J].矿物岩石,2005,12:69-72
    [25] Luo Y M,Christie P. Select ion of extractant for soil reducible trace metals changes the subsequent oxidisable metal fraction in sequential extraction schemes[J]. International Journal of Environmental Analytic Chemistry, 1998,72:59-75
    [26] Luo Y M,Christie P. Bioavailability of copper and zinc in soils treated with alkaline stabilised sewage sludges[J]. Journal of Environmental Quality,1998,27(2):347-354
    [27] Li R Y, Yang H, Zhou Z G, et al. Fractionation of heavy metals in sediments from Dianchi lake, China[J]. Pedosphere, 2007,17(2):265-272
    [28] Perin G, Craboledda L, Lucchese M. et al. Heavy metal speciation in the sediments of Northern Adriatic Sea-A new approach for environmental toxicity determination[J]. Heavy Metal in the Environment,1985,5:454-456
    [29] Marco T G,Joaquín D,Stefano A,et al. Heavy metals fractionation and multivariate statistical techniques to evaluate the environmental risk in soils of Huelva Township (SW Iberian Peninsula)[J]. Journal of Geochemical Exploration,2012,119:32-43
  • 加载中
WeChat 点击查看大图
计量
  • 文章访问数:  1603
  • HTML全文浏览数:  1354
  • PDF下载数:  592
  • 施引文献:  0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2014-04-10
  • 刊出日期:  2014-11-15
陆泗进, 王业耀, 何立环. 风险评价代码法对农田土壤重金属生态风险的评价[J]. 环境化学, 2014, 33(11): 1857-1863. doi: 10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2014.11.021
引用本文: 陆泗进, 王业耀, 何立环. 风险评价代码法对农田土壤重金属生态风险的评价[J]. 环境化学, 2014, 33(11): 1857-1863. doi: 10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2014.11.021
shu
LU Sijin, WANG Yeyao, HE Lihuan. Ecological risk of heavy metals in agricultral soils assessed by risk assessment code[J]. Environmental Chemistry, 2014, 33(11): 1857-1863. doi: 10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2014.11.021
Citation: LU Sijin, WANG Yeyao, HE Lihuan. Ecological risk of heavy metals in agricultral soils assessed by risk assessment code[J]. Environmental Chemistry, 2014, 33(11): 1857-1863. doi: 10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2014.11.021
shu

风险评价代码法对农田土壤重金属生态风险的评价

  • 1. 中国环境监测总站, 北京, 100012
  • 收稿日期:  2014-04-10
基金项目:

中国工程院重大咨询项目"中国食品安全现状、问题及对策战略研究"课题资助.

摘要: 为揭示矿区周边农田土壤中重金属分布特征及其潜在生态风险,于2013年在云南省某铅锌矿周边的农田土壤共布设68个采样点,分析土壤中Cd、Hg、As、Pb、Cr、Cu和Zn的含量及污染程度,并采用改进的BCR法测定了各重金属形态分布特征,在此基础上运用风险评价代码法评价了重金属的潜在风险程度.结果表明,7种重金属都存在不同程度的超标,其中超标最严重的是Cd和Zn,超标率分别达到92.6%和75%.7种重金属化学形态也不尽相同:在重金属有效态中,Cd的水溶态和可提取态较高(平均值达到31.2%);Pb、Cu和Zn可还原态、可氧化态这两部分含量较高,两部分之和的平均值分别可达到27.9%、30%和29.2%;Hg、As和Cr的残渣态含量较高,平均值分别为90.4%、72.9%和76.8%.风险评价代码评价结果表明,54.4%的样点Cd为高生态风险,45.6%的样点Cd为中度生态风险;100%的样点Zn为中度生态风险;Cu有41.2%的点位属于低生态风险,58.8%的点位属于中度生态风险;As和Pb主要以低生态风险为主(所占比例分别为92.6%和91.8%);Hg主要以无生态风险为主(所占97.1%).综上,该矿区周边农田土壤受到了严重的重金属污染,其中土壤中Cd的生态风险最高,同时,Zn和Cu的生态风险也不容忽视.

English Abstract

    全文HTML

参考文献 (29)

返回顶部

目录

/

返回文章
返回

Copyright © 2019 中国科学院生态环境研究中心