Chemometric evaluation of heavy metal pollutions in Patna region of the Ganges alluvial plain, India: implication for source apportionment and health risk assessment
- 131 Downloads
While metal pollution and distribution in soil are well documented for many countries, the situation is more serious in developing countries because of the rapid increase in industrialization and urbanization during last decades. Although it is well documented in developed countries, data about substantial metal pollution in Indian soil, especially in eastern Ganges alluvial plain (GAP), are limited. In this study, eight different blocks of Patna district located in eastern GAP were selected to investigate the contamination, accumulation, and sources of metals in surface soil considering different land use types. Additionally, human health risk assessment was estimated to mark the potential carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic effect of metals in soil. The concentration of all metals (except Pb) in soil was below the Indian standard limit of the potential toxic element for agricultural soil. Pb was the most abundant in soil, followed by Zn and Cu, and accounted for 52, 33 and 8% of the total metal. In terms of land use types, roadside soil detected higher concentrations of all metals, followed by park/grassland soil. Principal component analysis results indicated traffic pollution and industrial emissions are the major sources of heavy metals in soil. This was further confirmed by strong inter-correlation of heavy metals (Cd, Cr, Ni, Cu and Pb). Human health risk assessment results indicated ingestion via soil as the primary pathway of heavy metal exposure to both adults and children population. The estimated hazard index was highest for Pb, suggesting significant non-carcinogenic effect to both adults and children population. The children were more prone to the non-carcinogenic effect of Pb than adults. However, relatively low cancer risk value estimated for all metals suggested non-significant carcinogenic risk in the soil.
KeywordsMetal pollution Carcinogenic Principal component analysis Cluster analysis Traffic pollution Industrial emission
This study was supported by University Grant Commission (UGC), Government of India (No.F.30-68/2014 (BSR) to NL Devi as Start-Up-Research Grant.
- Alloway, B. J. (1990). Cadmium. In B. J. Alloway (Ed.), Heavy metals in soils (pp. 100–124). Glasgow: Blackie and Son.Google Scholar
- Awashthi, S. K. (2000). Prevention of food adulteration act no 37 of 1954. Central and state rules as amended for 1999 (3rd ed.). New Delhi: Ashoka Law House.Google Scholar
- Bocca, B., Alimonti, A., Petrucci, F., Violante, N., Sancesario, G., & Forte, G. (2004). Quantification of trace elements by sector field inductively coupled plasma spectrometry in urine, serum, blood and cerebrospinal fluid of patients with Parkinson’s disease. Spectrochimica Acta B, 59, 559–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bottoms, S. (2000). Cu probraze process in proving a hot technology. Materials World, 8, 1–18.Google Scholar
- Census of India. (2011). Administrative atlas of India. Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, New Delhi. Available at http://www.Disabilityaffairs.gov.in/upload/uploadfiles/files/disabilityinindia2011data.pdf. Accessed December 27, 2013.
- Dasgupta, S. P. (1984). The Ganga basin, part II. New Delhi: Central Board for Prevention and Control of Water Pollution.Google Scholar
- Faruqui, N. H., Nagar, M., & Dutt, A. K. (1992). Geoenvironmental appraisal of parts of Ganga Basin, Uttar Pradesh. In I. B. Singh (Ed.), Gangetic plain: Terra incognita (pp. 49–53). Lucknow, India: Geology Department Lucknow University.Google Scholar
- Gopal, B. (2000). River conservation in the Indian subcontinent. In P. J. Boon, B. R. Davies, & G. E. Pelts (Eds.), Global perspectives on river conservation: Science, policy and practice (pp. 233–261). London: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Jiménez-Ballesta, R., García-Navarro, F., Bravo, S., Amorós, J., Pérez-de-los-Reyes, C., & Mejías, M. (2017). Environmental assessment of potential toxic trace element contents in the inundated floodplain area of Tablas de Daimiel wetland (Spain). Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 39, 1159–1177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kabata-Pendias, A., & Pendias, H. (1999). Biogeochemistry of trace elements (2nd ed.). Warsaw: PWN. (in polish).Google Scholar
- Lokhande, P. B., Patil, V. V., & Mujawar, H. A. (2008). Multivariate statistical analysis of ground water in the vicinity of Mahad industrial area of Konkan Region, India. International Journal of Applied Environmental Science, 3(2), 149–163.Google Scholar
- Mehr, M. R., Keshavarzi, B., Moore, F., Sharifi, R., Lahijanzadeh, A., & Kermani, M. (2017). Distribution, source identification and health risk assessment of soil heavy metals in urban areas of Isfahan Province, Iran. Journal of African Earth Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2017.04.026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mireles, A., Solis, C., Andrade, E., Lagunas-Solar, M., Pina, C., & Flocchini, R. G. (2004). Heavy metal accumulation in plants and soil irrigated with wastewater from Mexico City. Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research, Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 219–220, 187–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Nimmo, J. W. (1998). New design radiators. Canadian Copper, 139, 8–9.Google Scholar
- Schneider, A. R., Morvan, X., Saby, N. P. A., Cancès, Be, Ponthieu, M., Gommeaux, M., et al. (2016). Multivariate spatial analyses of the distribution and origin of trace and major elements in soils surrounding a secondary lead smelter. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sinha, S., Gupta, A. K., Bhatt, K., Pandey, K., Rai, U. N., & Singh, K. P. (2006). Distribution of metals in the edible plants grown at Jajmau, Kanpur (India) receiving treated tannery wastewater: Relation with physico-chemical properties of the soil. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 115, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Trujillo-González, J. M., Torres-Mora, M. A., Keesstra, S., Brevik, E. C., & Jiménez-Ballesta, R. (2016). Heavy metal accumulation related to population density in road dust samples taken from urban sites under different land uses. Science of the Total Environment, 553(2016), 636–642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.101 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Tziritis, E., Datta, P. S., & Barzegar, R. (2017). Characterization and assessment of groundwater resources in a complex hydrological basin of central Greece (Kopaida basin) with the joint use of hydrogeochemical analysis, multivariate statistics and stable isotopes. Aquatic Geochemistry, 23(4), 271–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1989). Risk assessment guidance for superfund volume 1: Human health evaluation manual (part A) office of emergency and remedial response; Washington, DC, USA: (291 pp, 7 MB, 12/1989, EPA/540/1-89/002). https://www.epa.gov/risk/risk-assessment-guidance-superfund-rags-part.
- USEPA. (1997). Exposure factors handbook ( final report). Washington, DC: U.S. environmental protection agency, EPA/600/P-95/002F a-c, 1997. https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/recordisplay.cfm?deid=12464.
- USEPA. (2001). Toxics release inventory: Public data release report. Accessed on 24 Feb 2015. Available online: www.epa.gov/tri/tridata/tri01.
- USEPA. (2002). Supplemental guidance for developing soil screening levels for superfund sites OSWER 9355.4-24. Washington, DC, USA: United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2002 EPA540/F-95/041. https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-soil-screeningguidance.
- USEPA. (2007). Framework for determining a mutagenic mode of action for carcinogenicity: Review draft. Available online: http://www.epa.gov/osa/mmoaframework/pdfs/MMOA-ERD-FINAL-83007.pdf. Accessed October 3, 2015.
- USEPA. (2010). Integrated risk information system (IRIS); United States Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. Available online: www.epa.gov/ncea/iris/index.html. Accessed July 15, 2010.
- Wuana, R. A., & Okieimen, F. E. (2011). Heavy metals in contaminated soils: A review of sources, chemistry, risks and best available strategies for remediation. Geo Environmental & Climate Change Adaptation Research Centre, 2011, 20–21.Google Scholar