基于SOM模型的珠江河口河网铊生态风险评估

doi:10.11978/2020064

Abstract

Abstract:

The study of thallium concentration in the Pearl River Delta is of great significance for water resources protection in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. The table, middle and bottom layers of 11 sections at the estuary and network of the Pearl River were simultaneously sampled and monitored during the four hydrological periods, including spring tide and neap tide of withered water period and high water period. The concentrations of thallium in different layers of the 11 sections were determined, and their temporal and spatial distribution were analyzed. The Self Organizing Maps (SOM) gene expression clustering analysis method was used to fit the 528 thallium monitoring data. In addition, based on the potential ecological risk evaluation method and selected corresponding coefficients, the potential ecological risk of thallium in the Pearl River Estuary and network was assessed by using the SOM model. The results show that the exposure level of thallium in the Pearl River Estuary and network is generally low. The order of thallium concentration are Modaomen > Silong > Makou > Lingdingyang > Humen > Sanshui and neap tide of high water period > spring tide of high water period > spring tide of withered water period > neap tide of withered water period. The SOM analysis results show that the potential ecological risks are overall low in the Pearl River Estuary and network with the order of Modaomen, Makou, Silong, Lingdingyang, Humen, and Sanshui. This study indicates that the SOM method is suitable for cluster analysis of heavy metal pollutants.

Key words: Pearl River Estuary and network, thallium, SOM model, ecological risk

CLC Number:

X826

LAN Xuan, LI Feng, ZHANG Chao, DONG Hanying, YANG Qingshu, YU Minghui, WEN Rubing, YANG Yujie. Ecological risk assessment of thallium in Pearl River Estuary and network based on the SOM model[J].Journal of Tropical Oceanography, 2021, 40(3): 132-142.

Figures/Tables 8

Fig. 1

Tab. 1

Tab. 2

Tab. 3

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Tab. 4

References 30

[1]	毕建培, 刘晨, 崔凡, 2019. 珠江流域重要饮用水水源地安全状况评估及对策研究[J]. 水利发展研究, 19(8):33-36, 61.
[2]	陈学鹏, 2009. 铊中毒的危害以及预防[J]. 现代职业安全, (2):104-105.
[3]	陈小齐, 余明辉, 刘长杰, 等, 2020. 珠江三角洲近年地形不均匀变化对洪季水动力特征的影响[J]. 水科学进展, 31(1):81-90.
	CHEN XIAOQI, YU MINGHUI, LIU CHANGJIE, et al, 2020. Impact of recent uneven channel evolution on hydrodynamic characteristics during flood season in the Pearl River Delta[J]. Advances in Water Science, 31(1):81-90 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[4]	陈永亨, 张平, 吴颖娟, 等, 2013. 广东北江铊污染的产生原因与污染控制对策[J]. 广州大学学报(自然科学版), 12(4):26-31.
	CHEN YONGHENG, ZHANG PING, WU YINGJUAN, et al, 2013. The reasons and the control technology for thallium pollution in Beijiang, Guangdong Province[J]. Journal of Guangzhou University (Natural Science Edition), 12(4):26-31 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[5]	高博, 孙可, 任明忠, 等, 2008. 北江表层沉积物中铊污染的生态风险[J]. 生态环境, 17(2):528-532.
	GAO BO, SUN KE, REN MINGZHONG, et al, 2008. Ecological risk assessment of thallium pollution in the surface sediment of Beijiang River[J]. Ecology and Environment, 17(2):528-532 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[6]	广东省环境保护厅, 广东省质量技术监督局, 2017. DB 44/1989—2017 工业废水铊污染物排放标准[S]. 北京: 中国水利水电.
[7]	胡溪, 毛献忠, 2012. 珠江口磨刀门水道咸潮入侵规律研究[J]. 水利学报, 43(5):529-536.
	HU XI, MAO XIANZHONG, 2012. Study on saltwater intrusion in Modaomen of the Pearl Estuary[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 43(5):529-536 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[8]	解小凡, 刘娟, 王津, 等, 2015. 粤西河流表层沉积物重金属铊的环境地球化学特征及生态风险评价[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 45(增刊1):1509-06.
[9]	孔兰, 陈晓宏, 闻平, 等, 2011. 2009/2010年枯水期珠江口磨刀门水道强咸潮分析[J]. 自然资源学报, 26(11):1858-1865.
	KONG LAN, CHEN XIAOHONG, WEN PING, et al, 2011. Analysis on severe saltwater intrusion in Modaomen channel of the Pearl River Estuary in dry season during 2009-2010[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 26(11):1858-1865 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[10]	刘娟, 张平, 陈永亨, 等, 2008. 珠江柱状沉积物中铊化学形态的研究[J]. 广州大学学报(自然科学版), 7(1):67-70.
	LIU JUAN, ZHANG PING, CHEN YONGHENG, et al, 2008. Determination of thallium chemical form in sediment core from Pearl River[J]. Journal of Guangzhou University (Natural Science Edition), 7(1):67-70 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[11]	刘娟, 王津, 陈永亨, 等, 2015. 粤西某河流沉积物铊污染的铅同位素示踪研究[J]. 地质学报, 89(S1):278-279.
[12]	刘敬勇, 常向阳, 涂湘林, 等, 2010. 广东某硫酸废渣堆渣场周围土壤铊污染的地累积指数评价[J]. 土壤通报, 41(5):1231-1236.
	LIU JINGYONG, CHANG XIANGYANG, TU XIANGLIN, et al, 2010. Applying the index geoaccumulation to assessment of soil thallium pollution in soil around a thallium-containing slag pile site near a sulphuric acid plant in Guangdong province[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 41(5):1231-1236 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[13]	宋美英, 2014. 珠江河口水体和沉积物中重金属的分布特征及风险评估[D]. 广州: 暨南大学.
	SONG MEIYING, 2014. Distribution and assessment of heavy metals in water and sediments of the Pearl River Estuary[D]. Guangzhou: Jinan University (in Chinese with English abstract).
[14]	孙加龙, (2018-09-01). 粤港澳大湾区水环境整治的思路及对策研究[EB/OL]. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_539f650f01030uo9.html. SUN JIALONG. (2018-09-01).
[15]	唐天均, 2018. 粤港澳湾区水环境保护对策和建议[J]. 广东化工, 45(2):153-154.
	TANG TIANJUN, 2018. Measures and suggestions of water environment protection in Guangdong- Hong Kong-Macao greater bay area[J]. Guangdong Chemical Industry, 45(2):153-154 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[16]	万军, 李新, 关杨, 等, 2019. 坚持共保共享绿色发展建设粤港澳美丽大湾区[J]. 环境保护, 47(7):8-11.
	WAN JUN, LI XIN, GUAN YANG, et al, 2019. Strive for collaborative protecting, shared growth and green development, build a beautiful bay area of Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao[J]. Environmental Protection, 47(7):8-11 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[17]	中华人民共和国卫生部, 中国国家标准化管理委员会, 2007. GB 5749-2006 生活饮用水卫生标准[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社.
[18]	朱金格, 包芸, 胡维平, 等, 2010. 近50年来珠江河网区水动力对地形的响应[J]. 中山大学学报(自然科学版), 49(4):129-133.
	ZHU JINGE, BAO YUN, HU WEIPING, et al, 2010. Impact of channel evolution on hydrodynamics in the Pearl River Delta in the last 50 years[J]. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Sunyatseni, 49(4):129-133 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[19]	BANKS D, REIMANN C, RØYSET O, et al, 1995. Natural concentrations of major and trace elements in some Norwegian bedrock groundwaters[J]. Applied Geochemistry, 10(1):1-16. doi: 10.1016/0883-2927(94)00046-9
[20]	CHEAM V, LAWSON G, LECHNER J, et al, 1996. Thallium and cadmium in recent snow and firn layers in the Canadian Arctic by atomic fluorescence and absorption spectrometries[J]. Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, 355(3-4):332-335.
[21]	CLEVEN R, FOKKERT L, 1994. Potentiometric stripping analysis of thallium in natural waters[J]. Analytica Chimica Acta, 289(2):215-221. doi: 10.1016/0003-2670(94)80105-3
[22]	DALL'AGLIO M, FORNASERI M, BRONDI M, 1994. New data on thallium in rocks and natural waters from central and southern Italy: Insights into applications[J]. Mineralogy and Petrology, 37:103-112.
[23]	FLEGAL A R, PATTERSON C C, 1985. Thallium concentrations in seawater[J]. Marine Chemistry, 15(4):327-331. doi: 10.1016/0304-4203(85)90043-X
[24]	HAKANSON L, 1980. An ecological risk index for aquatic pollution control: a sedimentological approach[J]. Water Research, 14(8):975-1001. doi: 10.1016/0043-1354(80)90143-8
[25]	KASKI S, VENNA J, KOHONEN T, 1992. Coloring that reveals high-dimensional structures in data[C]// Proceedings of the 6th international conference on neural information processing. Perth, WA, Australia: IEEE, 2:729-734.
[26]	KOHONEN T, 2001. Self-organizing maps[M]. 3rd ed. Berlin: Springer.
[27]	LIN T S, NRIAGU J, 1999. Thallium speciation in the Great Lakes[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 33(19):3394-3397. doi: 10.1021/es981096o
[28]	LUO F, 1994. Determination of sub-ppb levels of thallium in natural water by STPF AAS after preconcentration using a polyerethane plastic foam column[J]. Atomic Spectroscopy, (15):216-219.
[29]	MÜLLER B, BERG M, YAO ZHIPING, et al, 2005. How polluted is the Yangtze River? Water quality downstream from the Three Gorges Dam[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 402(2-3):232-247. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.04.049
[30]	QU BIN, SILLANPÄÄ M, ZHANG YULAN, et al, 2015. Water chemistry of the headwaters of the Yangtze River[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 74(8):6443-6458. doi: 10.1007/s12665-015-4174-4

	观测断面	分层	枯水期铊浓度(μg·L^-1)
			大潮				小潮
			最大值	最小值	平均值	标准差	最大值	最小值	平均值	标准差
河口区域	伶仃洋	上层	0.032	0.003	0.014	0.007	0.033	0.001	0.016	0.009
		中层	0.031	0.006	0.016	0.008	1.270	0.002	0.080	0.273
		下层	0.029	0.005	0.017	0.006	0.042	0.006	0.017	0.009
		平均值	0.031	0.005	0.016		0.448	0.003	0.113
	虎门	上层	0.028	0.017	0.020	0.005	0.022	0.012	0.018	0.005
		中层	0.019	0.009	0.015	0.005	0.022	0.009	0.015	0.006
		下层	0.026	0.007	0.015	0.009	0.028	0.009	0.016	0.009
		平均值	0.024	0.011	0.017		0.024	0.010	0.016
	磨刀门	上层	0.030	0.017	0.022	0.006	0.027	0.017	0.023	0.004
		中层	1.302	0.016	0.338	0.643	0.026	0.011	0.016	0.004
		下层	0.028	0.008	0.019	0.009	0.027	0.013	0.018	0.006
		平均值	0.453	0.137	0.126		0.027	0.014	0.019
河网区域	马口	上层	1.320	0.003	0.648	0.738	0.026	0.013	0.022	0.006
		中层	0.024	0.016	0.020	0.004	0.023	0.003	0.015	0.009
		下层	0.022	0.013	0.016	0.004	0.020	0.028	0.023	0.003
		平均值	0.455	0.011	0.228		0.023	0.015	0.020
	三水	上层	0.027	0.009	0.014	0.008	1.330	0.008	0.341	0.660
		中层	0.021	0.009	0.016	0.005	0.029	0.002	0.020	0.012
		下层	0.026	0.006	0.015	0.009	0.016	0.006	0.012	0.004
		平均值	0.025	0.008	0.015		0.458	0.005	0.124
	石龙	上层	0.021	0.003	0.017	0.009	1.435	0	0.192	0.502
		中层	1.235	0.012	0.171	0.430	1.430	0.012	0.196	0.499
		下层	0.024	0.012	0.017	0.005	1.369	0.008	0.186	0.478
		平均值	0.427	0.009	0.068		1.411	0.007	0.191

	观测断面	分层	丰水期铊浓度/(μg·L^-1)
			大潮				小潮
			最大值	最小值	平均值	标准差	最大值	最小值	平均值	标准差
河口区域	伶仃洋	上层	0.122	0.028	0.066	0.024	0.117	0.043	0.072	0.018
		中层	0.120	0.028	0.063	0.021	0.148	0.043	0.078	0.024
		下层	0.101	0.031	0.061	0.020	0.141	0.040	0.079	0.026
		平均值	0.114	0.029	0.063		0.135	0.042	0.076
	虎门	上层	0.096	0.048	0.069	0.020	0.078	0.068	0.074	0.004
		中层	0.082	0.065	0.070	0.008	0.084	0.064	0.075	0.007
		下层	0.071	0.063	0.067	0.004	0.092	0.077	0.082	0.007
		平均值	0.083	0.059	0.069		0.085	0.070	0.077
	磨刀门	上层	0.274	0.129	0.187	0.048	0.173	0.101	0.134	0.037
		中层	0.120	0.057	0.086	0.027	0.089	0.057	0.077	0.016
		下层	0.165	0.084	0.129	0.034	0.136	0.080	0.105	0.023
		平均值	0.186	0.090	0.134		0.133	0.079	0.105
河网区域	马口	上层	0.101	0.068	0.086	0.015	0.104	0.071	0.092	0.014
		中层	0.103	0.073	0.082	0.014	0.125	0.065	0.082	0.029
		下层	0.087	0.063	0.077	0.011	0.091	0.081	0.085	0.002
		平均值	0.097	0.068	0.082		0.107	0.072	0.086
	三水	上层	0.139	0.022	0.093	0.050	0.051	0.017	0.030	0.015
		中层	0.140	0.073	0.109	0.030	0.051	0.020	0.030	0.015
		下层	0.148	0.102	0.121	0.023	0.021	0.016	0.019	0.002
		平均值	0.142	0.066	0.108		0.041	0.018	0.026
	石龙	上层	0.112	0.073	0.176	0.012	0.090	0.014	0.075	0.025
		中层	0.097	0.074	0.087	0.008	0.092	0.066	0.080	0.008
		下层	0.095	0.073	0.086	0.008	0.100	0.074	0.086	0.008
		平均值	0.101	0.073	0.116		0.094	0.051	0.080

	区域(年份)	铊浓度/(μg·L^-1)
国内	本文研究区域(2016—2017年)	未检出~1.43
	广东西江流域(2013年)(解小凡等, 2015)	0.01~0.1
	成都某两条河水(1993年)(Luo, 1994)	0.0216~0.065
	长江下游(2006年)(Müller et al, 2005)	0.05
	三峡大坝河水(2006年)(Müller et al, 2005)	0.019~0.111
	长江源头(2012年)(Qu et al, 2015)	0.00416
	GB5749–2006生活饮用水卫生标准(中华人民共和国卫生部等, 2007)	0~0.1
	DB44/1989—2017工业废水铊污染物排放标准(广东省环境保护厅等, 2017)	0~5; 0~2
国外	太平洋和大西洋(1985年)(Flegal et al, 1985)	0.012~0.016
	莱茵河(1994年)(Cleven et al, 1994)	0.006~0.715
	北美五大湖湖水(1995—1997年)(Lin et al, 1999)	0.001~0.036
	意大利、挪威地下水(1994、1995年)(Dall’aglio et al, 1994; Banks et al, 1995)	0.001~1.26
	北极雪水(1993年)(Cheam et al, 1996)	0.003~0.009

观测断面	分层	铊的浓度聚类	铊的潜在生态风险聚类		观测断面	分层	铊的浓度聚类	铊的潜在生态风险聚类
观测断面	分层	输出结果	输出结果	评价等级	观测断面	分层	输出结果	输出结果	评价等级
伶仃洋1	上	1.5	0.5	低度	磨刀门	上	6.5	10.0	极高
	中	1.0	0.5	低度		中	8.5	8.0	极高
	下	0.5	0.5	低度		下	10.0	7.5	高
伶仃洋2	上	0.5	1.5	低度	马口	上	9.5	8.0	极高
	中	1.0	0.5	低度		中	8.0	8.0	极高
	下	1.5	0.5	低度		下	6.0	3.0	中度
伶仃洋3	上	0.5	0.5	低度	三水	上	1.5	0.5	低度
	中	1.0	0.5	低度		中	3.0	0.5	低度
	下	1.0	0.5	低度		下	2.5	2.0	低度
伶仃洋4	上	0.5	0.5	低度	石龙南	上	7.5	7.5	高
	中	0.5	0.5	低度		中	7.0	7.0	高
	下	0.5	0.5	低度		下	10.0	10.0	极高
伶仃洋5	上	0.5	1.5	低度	石龙北	上	7.0	6.5	高
	中	0.5	0.5	低度		中	3.0	6.5	高
	下	2.5	3.0	中度		下	2.5	6.0	高
虎门	上	2.5	0.5	低度
	中	2.5	0.5
	下	2.5	0.5

Ecological risk assessment of thallium in Pearl River Estuary and network based on the SOM model

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 8

References 30

Related Articles 4

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	WANG Huifang, HUANG Xiuqing, LIU Jianhua, XU Meina, JIANG Yunyun, QIU Jufei. Potential ecological risk assessment of red tide disaster in Haitan Strait of Fujian Province [J]. Journal of Tropical Oceanography, 2021, 40(4): 122-133.
[2]	TANG Bo, LONG Jiang-ping, JIN Lu, XU Dong, LI Tuan-jie. The contrast of heavy metals’ ecological risks in marine sediments between the Beibu Gulf and the Pearl River Delta [J]. Journal of Tropical Oceanography, 2015, 34(3): 75-81.
[3]	ZHANG Xiao-hua, ZHONG Li-feng, MIAO Li, HUANG Wei-xia, YAN Wen. Distribution characteristics of cadmium and assessment of its potential ecological risk in the surface sediments of five typical bays in the east coast areas of Guangdong Province [J]. Journal of Tropical Oceanography, 2013, 32(2): 118-127.
[4]	DAI Ji-cui,GAO Xiao-wei,NI Jin-ren,YIN Kui-hao. Evaluation of heavy-metal pollution in Shenzhen coastal sediments [J]. Journal of Tropical Oceanography, 2010, 29(1): 85-90.