2021
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-14695-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ecological risk assessment of heavy metals in farmland soils in Beijing by three improved risk assessment methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition to Pb and Cu, whose concentrations from 18 sample sites were lower than the background values, the remaining heavy metal concentrations were higher than the background at some sampling points and lower than the background at other sampling points, while the average contents of Cd, Sb and Ni were higher than the background content, especially Cd, whose maximum concentration was higher than the background values of Cd in Tibet by more than four times, which was essentially the same as the previous findings by Bing et al [30] and Hou et al [31]. It can be found that the differences in the spatial distribution characteristics of heavy metal concentrations in the study area are complex, on the one hand influenced by the soil-forming parent rocks [32], which are the main cause of the differences in the background values of heavy metals in different areas. On the other hand, rock weathering or erosion will release heavy metals into the environment, thus affecting the concentration of heavy metals in the environment.…”
Section: Variations In Heavy Metal Concentrationssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…In addition to Pb and Cu, whose concentrations from 18 sample sites were lower than the background values, the remaining heavy metal concentrations were higher than the background at some sampling points and lower than the background at other sampling points, while the average contents of Cd, Sb and Ni were higher than the background content, especially Cd, whose maximum concentration was higher than the background values of Cd in Tibet by more than four times, which was essentially the same as the previous findings by Bing et al [30] and Hou et al [31]. It can be found that the differences in the spatial distribution characteristics of heavy metal concentrations in the study area are complex, on the one hand influenced by the soil-forming parent rocks [32], which are the main cause of the differences in the background values of heavy metals in different areas. On the other hand, rock weathering or erosion will release heavy metals into the environment, thus affecting the concentration of heavy metals in the environment.…”
Section: Variations In Heavy Metal Concentrationssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…In addition, in order to accurately evaluate whether the residual heavy metals in the amendment materials would pose a potential risk of pollution to the environment, the Hakanson risk evaluation method was used to evaluate the potential hazard of heavy metals to the environment [43][44][45]. The potential ecological hazard indices RI of Cu, Cr, Cd, and Ni in the modified materials were 2.0586, 1.9864, 2.2207, and 2.5977 when the pH levels of the leaching solution were 8.5, 9.3, 10.3, and 11.3, respectively, which were much lower than 150, indicating that they were less ecologically hazardous.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, other factors, such as industrial emissions, the historic application of mercurycontaining pesticides and fertilisers in agriculture, and sewage irrigation, also contribute to Hg pollution (Mirlean et al, 2008;Chen et al, 2013;Bavec et al, 2014;Schneider, 2021;Fisher et al, 2023).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%