, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 2907-2917

Sources of polycyclic hydrocarbons and pesticides in soluble fraction of deposition samples in Kocaeli, Turkey

Purchase on Springer.com

$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access

Abstract

A wet–dry deposition sampler was located at The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey-National Metrology Institute (TUBITAK-UME) station, and a bulk deposition sampler was placed at the Kadıllı village to determine the atmospheric deposition flux of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and pesticides (organochlorine and organophosphorus) in soluble fraction of samples in Kocaeli, Turkey. The 28 samples for each wet, dry, and total deposition were collected weekly from March 2006 to March 2007. Gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was used to analyze the samples which were prepared by using solid-phase extraction (SPE) method. The sum of volume weighted mean of deposition fluxes was obtained as 7.43 μg m−2 day−1 for wet deposition, 0.28 μg m−2 day−1 for dry deposition and 0.54 μg m−2 day−1 for bulk deposition samples for PAHs and 9.88 μg m−2 day−1 for wet deposition, 4.49 μg m−2 day−1 for dry deposition, and 3.29 μg m−2 day−1 for bulk deposition samples for pesticides. While benzo(a)anthracene had the highest fluxes among PAH compounds for all types of depositions, guthion and phosphamidon had the highest deposition flux compared with the other pesticides. Benzo(ghi)perylene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene, benzo(a)pyrene, and acenaphthene were not detected in any of the samples. Beta-HCH, gamma-HCH, and endrin aldehyde were the only compounds among 18 organochlorine pesticides to be detected in all deposition samples. The main sources of pesticides were the high number of greenhouses around the sampling stations. However, all of the organophosphorus pesticides were detected in all deposition samples. The pollution sources were identified as coal and natural gas combustion, petrogenic sources, and traffic for TUBITAK-UME station whereas coal and natural gas combustion and traffic were the main sources for Kadıllı station by considering the results of factor analysis, ratios, and wind sector analysis.

Responsible editor: Constantini Samara