scholarly journals Heavy metal pollution northern river basin Zhaiyk with in the West Kazakhstan region

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-117
Author(s):  
N. Ramazanova ◽  
◽  
S. Toksanbaeva ◽  
Z. Auyezova ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heavy Metal ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Metal Pollution ◽  
Heavy Metal Pollution ◽  
The West ◽  
Northern River ◽  
West Kazakhstan

scholarly journals Geochemical assessment of heavy metal pollution of river basin in Nigeria using stream sediment

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 198
Author(s):  
Oluwafunso Oladipo Awosusi ◽  
Adeshina Luqman Adisa
Keyword(s):  
Heavy Metals ◽  
Heavy Metal ◽  
Enrichment Factor ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Metal Pollution ◽  
Heavy Metal Pollution ◽  
Stream Sediment ◽  
The Body ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Concentration

Heavy metal pollution has been a source of health problems in humans. These metals are persistent, toxic, non-degradable and often take a long time to be eliminated from the body. This study is, therefore, designed to assess heavy metal pollution of River Basin in Nigeria. Seventy stream sediment samples were systematically collected from an area, approximately 400km2, latitude 7O 00’ and 7O 15’N and longitude 5O 11’ and 5O 19’E. The pollution status of the sediments by heavy metals were assessed by Enrichment Factor (EF), Pollution Load Index (PLI) and Geo-accumulation Index (Igeo). The concentrations of the heavy metals were also compared with United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Sediment quality guidelines (SQG). The samples were dried in the laboratory, disaggregated, sieved to minus 80 (<177 microns) mesh size using nylon sieve. The sieved samples were, then, digested and the concentrations of As, Co, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb, V and Zn were determined by Wavelength Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry (WD-XRFS). Results revealed that the mean concentrations of the heavy metals are in the order V>Zn>Pb>As>Ni>Co>Fe>Mn. Furthermore, the mean concentration of lead exceeded both the average world shale and the USEPA SQG values. However, the mean concentration of cobalt, nickel, manganese and zinc were lower than the average world shale values for these elements. The Enrichment Factor (EF) revealed that cobalt was moderately enriched while arsenic and lead were significantly enriched in the sediments. On the basis of the geoaccumulation index, the stream sediments were largely uncontaminated except at some sites that were moderately to strongly contaminated by As and Pb.  

Heavy Metal Pollution and Eutrophication in the Lower Salado River Basin (Argentina)

2006 ◽  
Vol 178 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 335-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. M. Gagneten ◽  
S. Gervasio ◽  
J. C. Paggi
Keyword(s):  
Heavy Metal ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Metal Pollution ◽  
Heavy Metal Pollution ◽  
Salado River

scholarly journals Identification of Heavy Metal Pollution Source Due to Idol Immersion Activity Across the Cauvery River Basin, Tamil Nadu, South India

2021 ◽  
Vol 120 (1) ◽  
pp. 200
Author(s):  
Vinothkannan Anbazhagan ◽  
Rajaram Rajendran ◽  
Ganeshkumar Arumugam ◽  
Arun Ganeshan
Keyword(s):  
Heavy Metal ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Metal Pollution ◽  
Heavy Metal Pollution ◽  
Tamil Nadu ◽  
South India ◽  
Pollution Source ◽  
Cauvery River ◽  
Idol Immersion ◽  
Cauvery River Basin

scholarly journals Comprehensive assessment of groundwater quality using heavy metal pollution indices and geospatial technique: A case study from Wanaparthy watershed of upper Krishna River basin, Telangana, India.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suantak Paolalsiam Vaiphei ◽  
Rama Mohan Kurakalva
Keyword(s):  
Heavy Metals ◽  
Heavy Metal ◽  
Groundwater Quality ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Metal Pollution ◽  
Heavy Metal Pollution ◽  
Pollution Indices ◽  
Runoff Water ◽  
Water Interaction ◽  
Guideline Values

Abstract The present study is to characterize groundwater quality using heavy metal pollution indices and geospatial variations. A total of 58 samples from hand pump/submersible bore wells were collected from the Wanaparthy watershed of the upper Krishna River basin according to the grid size (5*6 km 2 ). The heavy metals concentration in groundwater samples are found in the order of Zn(38.67%)> B(32.67%)> Ba(13.59%)> As(8.49%)> Hg(3.71%)> Cr(1.28%)> Ni(0.52%)> Cd(0.47%). Among these heavy metals, arsenic (22.4%) and mercury (5.1%) were found above the permissible limits of WHO drinking water guideline values. A positive correlation between pH versus B/Ba/Hg, TH versus EC/TDS, and B versus Ba indicates the presence of metals due to chemical reaction (rock-water interaction). Arsenic correlation with EC/TDS/TH indicates artificial intervention. Drainage network analysis enumerates high concentration of parameters at near or joining to upper order of drainage system, which might be due to input of runoff water (interaction of variable rocks composition) and later stage infiltration to subsurface and reached to an aquifer. Heavy metal pollution index (HPI) showed 86.2% of samples are in the category of low class, whereas 12.1% of samples fall within medium class. According to metal index (MI) classification, 12.1% samples are in very pure, 24.14% samples are pure, while the remaining 63.8% samples are in the slightly to strongly affect category. This study suggested the main source of heavy metals in groundwater might be from the dominant granitoid rocks because the area is mostly devoid of industrialization.

Assessment of heavy metal pollution in sediments of the Sonora River basin impacted by mining activities

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. J. León‐García ◽  
A. Gómez‐Álvarez ◽  
D. M. Meza‐Figueroa ◽  
J. L. Valenzuela‐García ◽  
M. A. Encinas‐Romero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heavy Metal ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Metal Pollution ◽  
Heavy Metal Pollution ◽  
Mining Activities

scholarly journals Evaluation of Heavy Metal Pollution Index (HPI) and Metal Index (MI) of the groundwater in the Mesta River Basin, SW Bulgaria

2020 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-12
Author(s):  
Tanya Vasileva
Keyword(s):  
Heavy Metals ◽  
Heavy Metal ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Metal Pollution ◽  
Heavy Metal Pollution ◽  
Pollution Index ◽  
Heavy Metal Pollution Index ◽  
Metal Pollution Index ◽  
Ground Waters ◽  
Metal Index

Ground waters may undergo a process of contamination in various ways, but the presence and amount of heavy metals in them can be indicative of their purity and usage. Apart from that, the heavy metals are among the most widely spread pollutants in nature, and their presence in groundwater indicates the existence of natural or anthropogenic sources of contamination. Ground waters polluted with heavy metals can also be very toxic and harmful to human health, and very damaging to the environment as well. In this article, the concentrations of eight toxic heavy metals (Fe, Mn, Cu, Al, Ni, Pb, Zn, Cr) were analyzed in the ground waters of the Mesta River Basin. A number of data for the concentrations of those heavy metals were used in order to calculate the following two indices describing groundwater purity: the Heavy Metal Pollution Index (HPI), and the Metal Index (MI). Both indices describe the overall quality of groundwater in direct relationship to the sum total of heavy metal concentrations. On one hand, minimal concentrations of heavy metals are necessary for the faultless functioning of organisms and indispensable to various biochemical processes, but on the other hand, in high concentrations, they might lead to dysfunctions in the cells of healthy organisms, and problems within their enzyme system. And these effects are entirely dependent upon the nature of the heavy metals involved. The research carried out so far shows that, according to HPI, about 65% of the shallow ground waters in the Mesta River Basin can be classified as being of excellent quality. The values obtained for the HPI are in the range of 3 to 64 (id est under the critical value of 100), or the groundwater is not contaminated with heavy metals. The MI varies within the range of 0.3 to 2.6, and therefore the groundwater from the zones with active water exchange can be characterized as being of slight to medium poor quality (41%), and the groundwater within Class II (or classified as pure with values of MI between 0.3 and 1.0) comprise approximately 59% of the overall catchment area.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document