Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 325–334 | Cite as

The occurrence and environmental effect of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) in Taurus Mountains soils

  • Cafer Turgut
  • Levent Atatanir
  • Birgül Mazmanci
  • Mehmet Ali Mazmanci
  • Bernhard Henkelmann
  • Karl-Werner Schramm
Research Article

Abstract

Purpose

Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are of global concern due to their ubiquitous presence and toxicity. The occurence of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs), -dibenzofurans (PCDFs), co-planar biphenyls (PCBs), hexachlorocyclohexanes (HCH), dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethanes (DDT), and organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) in forest soil collected from Taurus mountains may have adverse effects on the environment and health. The aim of the study was to investigate the outcome and distribution of POPs in the environment and the possible grasshopper effect along an altitude transect from sea level up to nearly 2,000 m a.s.l at a spatial distance of about 60 km in the southeastern Turkish Mediterranean Sea.

Methods

The samples were collected at a height of 121, 408, 981, 1,225, 1,373, 1,639, and 1,881 m above sea level from Taurus Mountains, Turkey. The results were confirmed using high-resolution gas chromatography–high-resolution mass spectrometry.

Results

The levels of the PCDD in forest soil from Taurus Mountains varied from nearly 4 to 12 pg g−1 dry weight (dw). PCDF concentrations ranged from 2 to 7 pg g−1 dw. Considerably high DDT levels detected in five stations indicated (3,223–24,564 pg g−1) its extensive local application or atmospheric transport. PCB levels were determined between 80 and 288 pg g−1 dw. HCH concentrations ranged from 141 to 1,513 pg g−1 dw. The other OCP was between 102 and 731 pg g−1.

Conclusion

Although the use of POPs has been banned, our results show that they could still be found in Turkey. Their presence may be attributed to the degradation of pesticides which are newly banned and, as well as to the atmospheric migration and deposition. The lattitude of sampling sites, the chemical, and physical parameters of soil have observed no effect on the fate of POPs in the environment.

Keywords

Persistence organic pollutants Forest soil Taurus Mountains Turkey 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research has been supported by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) and International Bureau of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Germany through a joint research project (project nos.109 T002 in Turkey and TUR 08/002 in Germany), and we would like to thank both Serhan MERMER and Melis USLUY for their assistance in carrying out the extensive investigations

References

  1. Bakoglu M, Karademir A, Durmusoglu E (2005) Evaluation of PCDD/F levels in ambient air and soils and estimation of deposition rates in Kocaeli, Turkey. Chemosphere 59(10):1373–1385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Belis CA, Offenthaler I, Uhl M, Nurmi-Legat J, Bassan R, Jakobi G, Kirchner M, Knoth W, Krauchi N, Levy W, Magnani T, Moche W, Schramm KW, Simoncic P, Weiss P (2009) A comparison of Alpine emissions to forest soil and spruce needle loads for persistent organic pollutants (POPs). Environ Pollut 157(12):3185–3191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bouwman H (2004) South Africa and the Stockholm convention on persistent organic pollutants. South African J Sci 100(7–8):323–328Google Scholar
  4. Bouyoucous GJ (1951) A recalibration of the hydrometer methods for making mechanical analysis of soils. Agron J 43:434–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burt R (2004) Soil survey laboratory methods manual (SSIR 42). 4.0 Soil survey ınvestigations report no. 42. United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  6. De Maagd PGJ, Ten Hulscher DTEM, Van den Heuvel H, Opperhuizen A, Sijm DTHM (1998) Physicochemical properties of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: aqueous solubilities, n-octanol/water partition coefficients, and Henry’s law constants. Environ Toxicol Chem 17(2):251–257Google Scholar
  7. Falandysz J, Strandberg B, Strandberg L, Bergqvist PA, Rappe C (1998) Concentrations and spatial distribution of chlordanes and some other cyclodiene pesticides in Baltic plankton. Sci Total Environ 215(3):253–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fenge T (2000) Indigenous people and global POPs. Northern Perspectives 26(1):8–14Google Scholar
  9. Harner T, Wideman JL, Jantunen LMM, Bidleman TF, Parkhurst MJ (1999) Residues of organochlorine pesticides in Alabama soils. Environ Pollut 106(3):323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Henkelmann B, Schramm KW, Klimm C, Kettrup A (1996) Quality criteria for the isotope dilution method with HRGC/MS. Fresenius J Anal Chem 354(7–8):818–822Google Scholar
  11. Iozza S, Schmid P, Oehme M, Bassan R, Belis C, Jakobi G, Kirchner M, Schramm KW, Krauchi N, Moche W, Offenthaler I, Weiss P, Simoncic P, Knoth W (2009) Altitude profiles of total chlorinated paraffins in humus and spruce needles from the Alps (MONARPOP). Environ Pollut 157(12):3225–3231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Keith LH (1997) Environmental endocrine disrupter. A handbook of property data. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Kosubova P, Grabic R, Holoubek I (2005) Toxaphene and other chlorinated pesticides in the Czech mountain and lowland forest ecosystems. Fresen Environ Bull 14(3):160–166Google Scholar
  14. Kukucka P, Klanova J, Sanka M, Holoubek I (2009) Soil burdens of persistent organic pollutants—their levels, fate and risk. Part II. Are there any trends in PCDD/F levels in mountain soils? Environ Pollut 157(12):3255–3263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lindsay WL, Norvell WA (1978) Development of a DTPA test for zinc, iron, manganese and copper. Soil Sci Soc Am J 42:421–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Martens D, Balta-Brouma K, Brotsack R, Michalke B, Schramel P, Klimm C, Henkelmann B, Oxynos K, Schramm KW, Diamadopoulos E, Kettrup A (1998) Chemical impact of uncontrolled solid waste combustion to the vicinity of the Kouroupitos Ravine, Crete, Greece. Chemosphere 36(14):2855–2866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Meijer SN, Ockenden WA, Sweetman A, Breivik K, Grimalt JO, Jones KC (2003) Global distribution and budget of PCBs and HCB in background surface soils: ımplications or sources and environmental processes. Environ Sci Technol 37(4):667–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moilanen R, Pyysalo H, Kumpulainen J (1986) Average total dietary ıntakes of organochlorine compounds from the finnish diet. Zeitschrift Fur Lebensmittel-Untersuchung Und-Forschung 182(6):484–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nieuwoudt C, Quinn LP, Pieters R, Jordaan I, Visser M, Kylin H, Borgen AR, Giesy JP, Bouwman H (2009) Dioxin-like chemicals in soil and sediment from residential and industrial areas in central South Africa. Chemosphere 76(6):774–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Offenthaler I, Jakobi G, Kaiser A, Kirchner M, Krauchi N, Niedermoser B, Schramm KW, Sedivy I, Staudinger M, Thanner G, Weiss P, Moche W (2009) Novel sampling methods for atmospheric semi-volatile organic compounds (SOCs) in a high altitude alpine environment. Environ Pollut 157(12):3290–3297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Olsen SR, Sommers EL (1982) Phosphorous availabilty indices, phosphorous soluble in sodium bicarbonate. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (eds) Methods of soil analysis, part 2: chemical and microbiological properties, 2nd edn. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 404–430Google Scholar
  22. Roots O, Henkelmann B, Schramm KW (2004) Concentrations of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans in soil in the vicinity of a landfill. Chemosphere 57(5):337–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Salihoglu G, Tasdemir Y (2009) Prediction of the PCB pollution in the soils of Bursa, an industrial city in Turkey. J Hazard Mater 164(2–3):1523–1531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shegunova P, Klanova J, Holoubek I (2007) Residues of organochlorinated pesticides in soils from the Czech Republic. Environ Pollut 146(1):257–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stockholm Convention (2001) Stockholm convention on persistent organic pollutants. http://chm.pops.int/. http://chm.pops.int/Convention/tabid/54/language/en-US/Default.aspx#convtext. Accessed 8 June 2009
  26. Strandberg B, Hites RA (2001) Concentration of organochlorine pesticides in wine corks. Chemosphere 44(4):729–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tesar C (2000) POPs: what they are; how they are used; how they are transported. Northern Perspectives 26(1):2–5Google Scholar
  28. Thielen DR, Olsen G (1988) Optimization of alumina selectivity for tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxins and the ısomer-specific determination of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin. Anal Chem 60(13):1332–1336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Thomas GW (1982) Exchangeable cations. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (eds) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2: chemical and microbiological properties, 2nd edn. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 159–166Google Scholar
  30. Voigt K, Bruggemann R, Kirchner M, Schramm KW (2010) Influence of altitude concerning the contamination of humus soils in the German Alps: a data evaluation approach using PyHasse. Environ Sci Pollut Res 17(2):429–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Walkey I, Black CA (1934) An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification for the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci 37:29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wenzel KD, Manz M, Hubert A, Schuurmann G (2002) Fate of POPs (DDX, HCHs, PCBs) in upper soil layers of pine forests. Sci Total Environ 286(1–3):143–154Google Scholar
  33. Wu WZ, Xu Y, Schramm KW, Kettrup A (1997) Study of sorption, biodegradation and isomerization of HCH in stimulated sediment/water system. Chemosphere 35(9):1887–1894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yeniova M (1998) Biological and environmental monitoring of polychlorinated biphenyls. Ankara University, AnkaraGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cafer Turgut
    • 1
  • Levent Atatanir
    • 1
  • Birgül Mazmanci
    • 2
  • Mehmet Ali Mazmanci
    • 3
  • Bernhard Henkelmann
    • 4
  • Karl-Werner Schramm
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Faculty of AgricultureAdnan Menderes UniversityAydinTurkey
  2. 2.Faculty of Arts and Science, Department of BiologyMersin UniversityMersinTurkey
  3. 3.Engineering Faculty, Department of Environmental EngineeringMersin UniversityMersinTurkey
  4. 4.Helmholtz Zentrum München–German Research Center for Environmental Health (GmbH)Institute of Ecological ChemistryNeuherbergGermany
  5. 5.Department für BiowissenschaftenTUM, Wissenschaftszentrum Weihenstephan für Ernährung und LandnutzungFreisingGermany

Personalised recommendations