Next Article in Journal
Evaluating the Impact of Individual and Combined Toxicity of Imidacloprid, Cycloxaprid, and Tebuconazole on Daphnia magna
Next Article in Special Issue
Microorganisms and Biochar Improve the Remediation Efficiency of Paspalum vaginatum and Pennisetum alopecuroides on Cadmium-Contaminated Soil
Previous Article in Journal
Portunus pelagicus (Linnaeus, 1758) as a Sentinel Species to Assess Trace Metal Occurrence: A Case Study of Kuwait Waters (Northwestern Arabian Gulf)
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Spatial Distribution and Risk Assessment of Heavy Metal(oid)s Contamination in Topsoil around a Lead and Zinc Smelter in Henan Province, Central China

1
National Demonstration Center for Environmental and Planning, College of Geography and Environmental Science, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China
2
Key Laboratory of Geospatial Technology for the Middle and Lower Yellow River Regions, Henan University, Ministry of Education, Kaifeng 475004, China
3
Henan Engineering Research Center for Control & Remediation of Soil Heavy Metal Pollution, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China
4
School of Geographic Sciences, Xinyang Normal University, Xinyang 464000, China
5
Puyang Branch of Municipal Bureau of Ecological Environment, Puyang 457100, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Toxics 2023, 11(5), 427; https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11050427
Submission received: 31 March 2023 / Revised: 29 April 2023 / Accepted: 30 April 2023 / Published: 3 May 2023

Abstract

:
A total of 137 farmland soil samples were collected around a lead/zinc smelter within 64 km2. The concentration, spatial distribution, and potential source of nine heavy metal(oid)s (As, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, V, and Zn) in soils and their potential ecological risk were investigated in detail. The results showed that the average concentrations of Cd, Pb, Cr and Zn in these soils were higher than their background value in Henan Province, and the average content of Cd was 2.83 times of the risk screening values in the national standard of China (GB 15618-2018). According to the distribution of different heavy metal(oid)s in soils, Cd and Pb in soil decrease gradually with the increase of distance from the smelter to the surrounding area. This indicates that the Pb and Cd originate from smelters via airborne practices according to the typical air pollution diffusion model. The distribution of Zn, Cu, and As were similar to Cd and Pb. However, Ni, V, Cr, and Co were mainly affected by soil parent materials. The potential ecological risk of Cd was higher than those of other elements, and the risk grade of the other eight elements was mainly low. The polluted soils with significantly high and high potential ecological risk covered 93.84% of all the studied regions. This should be of serious concern to government. The results of a principal component analysis (PCA) and cluster analysis (CA) show that Pb, Cd, Zn, Cu, and As were the elements mainly stemmed from smelter and other types of plants, with a contribution rate of 60.08%, while Co, Cr, Ni, and V are mainly caused by nature, with a contribution rate of 26.26%.

1. Introduction

Soil is a fundamental resource for humanity, yet anthropogenic activities have resulted in substantial soil contamination [1,2,3]. Pollutants such as heavy metal(oid)s [3,4,5], oil [6], pesticides [7], and antibiotics [8] have been identified as significant contributors to this issue. Among these, heavy metal(oid)s are particularly ubiquitous, toxic, persistent, resistant to biodegradation, and capable of bioaccumulation in the food chain [9], posing a significant threat to human health and the ecosystem [3]. The assessment of heavy metal pollution status in soil has been a major focus of researchers, with investigations conducted on urban soils [10], roadside soils [11], soils in urban parks [12], and urban road dusts [13]. Heavy metal(oid)s can be released into the environment through natural and anthropogenic sources, with industrial production processes being a significant contributor [14,15,16]. Consequently, some researchers have concentrated on developing remedial methods for heavily polluted soils containing heavy metal(oid)s [17,18,19,20,21].
Some scholars have investigated the impact of smelting on the proliferation of heavy metal(oid)s in the surrounding soil [15,22,23] due to metal processing and manufacturing. The metals released during smelting can migrate to various environmental media including airborne particles [23], dust [24,25,26], gas [27,28], sewage [29], and solid waste [30], with soil being the most heavily impacted [31]. Wu et al. [32] reported that 99.1% of agricultural soil samples around a Pb/Zn mining and smelting area in southwest China were highly polluted or worse by Pb, Zn, and Cd. Atmospheric deposition is believed to be a significant contributor to the transport of heavy metal(oid)s to soil farther away [23,24,25,26,27,28,33]. The monsoon and wind directions influence the migration and sedimentation of the smelter waste gas to soil around the smelters [28].The high pollution from smelters is a great health risk to humans [33,34,35]. However, little research has been conducted on the effect of smelting on heavy metal(oid)s contamination in soil in Henan Province (China).
Henan Province, situated in central China, is a significant contributor to the production of wheat grain, with the highest yield in the country and accounting for approximately 25% of the national output. The quality of wheat grain produced in Henan Province has a substantial impact on China’s food security. Cheng et al. [36] studied the cultivated soils of Henan Province, with moderate and moderate-to-strong contamination from Mn and Zn. In a soil sample from a small watershed in the mountainous area of southern Henan, China, 68.55% of the topsoil in the study area was clean, with Hg found to be the main contamination element [37]. Previous research has demonstrated a positive correlation between the total Cd content in soil and the concentration of Cd in wheat grain near mining areas and plants [38,39,40]. Therefore, it is vital to conduct investigations into the impact of smelters on heavy metal(oid)s in agricultural soils in Henan Province.
The aims and objectives of the current investigation were threefold: (a) to examine the extent of contamination and spatial distributions of As, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, V, and Zn in agricultural soil surrounding the Pb/Zn smelter; (b) to evaluate the potential risks associated with heavy metal(oid)s pollution; and (c) to analyze the contribution of various sources of heavy metal(oid)s’ pollution to soil in the vicinity of the smelter.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The research site, situated in the northeast of Jiaozuo City in Henan Province, central China, approximately 22.4 km away, centered around the Dongfang Pb/Zn smelter (33°19′17.61″ N, 113°02′17″ E) is now closed (Figure 1). The Dongfang Gold Lead Co., Ltd. in Jiaozuo, China established the smelter in 2003 and produced lead, zinc oxide, gold, silver, copper, and indium. The smelter had a yearly production capability of 60,000 metric tons of electrolytic lead, 35,000 metric tons of sulfuric acid, 150 metric tons of silver, 0.5 metric tons of gold, and other commodities. Nevertheless, due to inadequate ecological management, the smelter discharged an extensive amount of pollutants into its surroundings during production. As a result, the local government closed the smelter in 2014. The study site encompasses villages, farmlands, highways, railways, and factories. It has a typical continental monsoon climate characterized by four distinct seasons, with an annual average temperature of 14.8 °C and a precipitation of 652 mm. The soil in the study area was classified as Luvisol and Fluvisol [41]. The primary crops grown in this area include wheat, corn, and vegetables, which serve as important food production bases for local residents and nearby markets.

2.2. Sampling Procedure

Soil samples were collected from a 64 km2 area around the Dongfang Pb/Zn smelter. Sampling sites were laid at intervals of 0.5 km around the smelter within 2 km and at intervals of 1 km within the range of 2–4 km around the smelter. Most of these samples were taken from agricultural fields, with just a few soil samples collected from grasslands and forests. The main crops in this area are wheat and maize. The sampling sites are shown in Figure 1. A total of 137 topsoil samples (0–20 cm depth) were collected around the smelter. To minimize heterogeneity and uncertainty, soil was sampled from five locations at each site within 5 m, and the collected samples were put into polyethylene bags, labeled, and transported to the laboratory. Samples were thoroughly mixed together, air-dried and manually crushed to 18 mesh size (1 mm) and 100 mesh size (0.15 mm) for detection of soil chemical properties and heavy metal contents.

2.3. Chemical Analysis

Soil pH was determined using a pH meter equipped with a glass electrode, at a soil to water ratio of 1:2.5 (w/v). Soil organic matter (OM) was analyzed by employing the wet oxidation technique with K2Cr2O7 and concentrated H2SO4, as outlined by Bi et al. [42]. Total nitrogen was quantified by the Kjeldahl method following digestion with H2SO4. Cation exchange capacity (CEC) was assessed using the ammonium acetate method. Total metal concentrations (Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, V, and Zn) were measured using ICP-AES (Thermo Fisher Dou6200, Waltham, NA, USA) after digestion with mixed strong acid HNO3, HF and HClO4 [43]. The As concentrations were determined using AFS (Haitian 3100, Haiguang Corp., Beijing, China), following the protocol outlined in our earlier publication [44]. Quality assurance and quality control were ensured by employing the standard reference material of ESS-2 from China, with the recovery of the nine heavy metal(oid)s ranging between 95% and 110%. The practical limits for the analysis of Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, V, and Zn were 0.003, 0.005, 0.004, 0.005, 0.008, 0.03, 0.004, 0.006 mg/L, respectively. Duplicated samples for each metal were analyzed simultaneously, with standard deviations within 5%.

2.4. Potential Ecological Risk (PER) Assessment

Potential ecological risk (PER) has been widely used for soil and sediment pollution assessment [45]. The PER index is calculated as follows [46]:
P E R = i = 1 n E r i = i = 1 n ( T r i × C r i ) = i = 1 n ( T r i × C i C n i )
where PER is the potential ecological risk caused by the overall contamination, E r i is the potential ecological risk index caused by individual heavy metal, T r i  is the biological toxic factor of an individual element, which is defined as: Zn = 1, V = Cr = 2, Cu = Co = Pb = 5, Ni = 6, As = 10, Cd = 30 [32,33,34]. C r i is the individual element pollution factor; the value is C i  divided by C n i , with C i being the concentration of element in soil samples, and C n i the reference value of the element. The background concentration of each metal in the Henan Province was used as the reference value. The division and class of Er and PER were defined in Table 1 [47].

2.5. Statistical Analysis

The descriptive statistics, origin data analysis, and PER calculation were executed using Microsoft Excel software 2010 (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA). Multivariate statistical techniques, including a principal components analysis (PCA) and cluster analysis (CA), were examined using SPSS 25.0 (IBM, New York, NY, USA). The spatial distribution of soil heavy metal(oid)s and PER was produced utilizing the ArcGIS 10.07 (ESRI, Redlands, CA, USA) software, employing the spatial analyst mode.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Heavy Metal Contamination

The chemical properties, such as pH, OM, total nitrogen (TN), CEC, and Fe, concentration of these soil samples around smelters are shown in Table 2. The average pH of the soil samples was 8.55, indicating that the soil in this area is alkaline. The average OM, CEC, and TN were 2.57%, 22.91 cmol/kg, 0.21%, respectively, which means the soil is still relatively fertile.
The mean concentrations of As, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, V, and Zn were 17.34, 2.6, 15.97, 101.07, 18.28, 9.31, 67.26, 45.95, and 72.18 mg/kg, respectively (Table 3). The mean concentrations of Pb, Cd, As, Zn, and Cr in these soil samples were all higher than that of the background value of Henan Province. However, the mean concentrations of Cu, Ni, and V were not higher than the background value. Among these metals, the mean concentration of Cd was four times higher than the risk screening values for soil contamination of agricultural land in China (0.6 mg/kg, GB15618-2018). Further, the Pb, Cd, and As content in some soil samples also exceeded the risk screening values of China, and the excess rate reached 8.03%, 94.89%, and 10.22%, respectively (Table 3). This shows that Cd is the most polluting element in soils around the smelter. This result implies that the Pb/Zn smelter has had a great impact on the content of heavy metal(oid)s in the surrounding soil, and the heavy metal(oid)s formed during the production process were distributed via sewage, aerosols, and dust [26]. The mean content of Pb in soil in the present study was twice as high than that in a study reported by Li et al. in Hunan province [48], although the As and Cd content were similar.
Table 3 presents the coefficients of variation (CV) for Pb and Cd, which were found to be 167.77% and 165.18%, respectively. These values indicate strong variations, defined by a CV greater than 100%. These significant changes in soil composition are likely the result of smelter discharge and other anthropogenic sources. Conversely, Zn, Cu, and Ni exhibited CVs between 40% and 70%, indicating moderate variations and suggesting little artificial influence by these elements. Furthermore, CVs for Cr, Co, V, and As were less than 40%, indicating weak variations. The findings suggest that these elements are influenced primarily by more uniform local parent materials without anthropogenic influence.

3.2. Spatial Distribution of Heavy Metal(oid)s

Precise spatial distribution maps of heavy metal(oid)s are an essential key to reducing the negative impacts on the ecosystem and residents [50]. According to Figure 2, the spatial distribution of heavy metal(oid)s can be classified into three categories based on the influence of the smelter. First, the concentration of Pb and Cd gradually decreases as distance from the center of the smelter increases. However, in the study area, only the west, east, and north areas meet the national soil environmental quality standard of 0.6 mg/kg, indicating that local soil has been severely contaminated by Cd. Furthermore, within a 0.5 km radius of the smelter, the Pb content exceeds the risk screening values of 170 mg/kg. Field surveys reveal that the soil in the study area was not irrigated with sewage and that there was no haphazard piling of smelting slag. Thus, it can be inferred that the presence of Pb and Cd in the soil was due to the emission of smoke and dust from the smelter, which settled near the smelter through atmospheric sedimentation [24]. The distribution of Pb and Cd takes on an oval shape that extends from northeast to southwest, which is likely linked to the southwesterly wind direction. Zhou et al. [22] reported that heavy metal(loid)s were mainly deposited within a 2 km distance to the smelters. In this study, the area influenced by Cd is larger than 4 km, Pb is 3 km, while the other elements are less than 2 km. In the process of atmospheric migration, with the increase of distance, the difference of the mean concentrations of the easily diffusible heavy metals becomes smaller [27].
Second, the concentrations of Zn, Cu, and As in the soil gradually decreased with increasing distance from the smelter, with a less pronounced decrease trend observed for Zn, Cu, and As compared to Pb and Cd. This indicate that Cd diffused more easily into a larger area than Zn, and farther away from the smelter [27]. The concentration of As in the soil near the smelter exceeded the national standard value of 25 mg/kg, but gradually decreased as the distance from the smelter increased. Regions with higher Cu concentrations were mainly concentrated in the southeast of the study area, and these regions were found to be consistent with the locations of chemical fertilizer plants and animal farms (Figure 2). It is inferred that the pollution sources of Cu in the study area are the chemical fertilizer plants and animal farms, which contribute to the overall increase of Cu in the soil. Previous research has reported that the average Cu concentration in pig feed sold in China has reached 200–300 mg/kg [51]. Additionally, aquaculture wastewater from the farms is commonly used for sewage irrigation, and animal manure is used as organic fertilizer in farmland, which is the primary reason for the high concentration of Cu in the soil surrounding the animal farms.
Third, the spatial distribution of Ni, V, Cr, and Co within the study area exhibited noticeable similarity, characterized by a distinct zonal pattern with elevated concentrations in the northwest-southeast along with the presence of 2–3 high-value centers. This distribution pattern is primarily attributable to the presence of the provincial highway (S233) traversing the area from north to south, as shown in Figure 1. Notably, the highway is surrounded by several industrial facilities such as fertilizer and briquette plants, among others. Soils in close proximity to the highway exhibited slightly higher concentrations of Ni, V, Cr, and Co, with the highest values recorded in the vicinity of the chemical fertilizer plant located in the southwest. The concentrations of these elements in the study area were relatively low, falling below national standards, with the lowest concentrations recorded in the northeastern region of the study area.
In general, the smelter has a significant impact on the concentration of Cd and Pb in the soil, particularly Cd. The distribution of these metals in the vicinity of the smelter displays a clear pattern of point source pollution diffusion model, with concentrations decreasing gradually with distance from the smelter. This phenomenon may be attributed to the deposition of atmospheric particulate matter from the smelter, which then settles in the surrounding area. The dispersion of Zn, Cu, and As is also influenced by the smelter, albeit to a lesser extent, with a limited range of influence. Conversely, the presence of Ni, V, Cr, and Co in the soil is largely independent of the smelter, and is instead influenced by other local industries, such as fertilizer and animal plants.

3.3. Assessment of Potential Ecological Risk (PER)

The potential ecological risk index of heavy metal(oid)s in soils is shown in Table 3. Notably, the Er for both Pb and Cd in all soil samples exhibit substantial variance, with Cd displaying the largest range. Relative to the other heavy metal(oid)s, Cd has the most significant range and mean Er, followed by Pb, As, Co, Cu, Cr, V, and Zn. The mean Er of Cd exceeds the mean value of the other heavy metal(oid)s by 500–10,000 times, a trend attributed to the higher toxicity response coefficient of Cd. Further, this finding underscores that the Cd levels in soil samples around the smelter are generally higher than the background value. The PER of the nine toxic elements in all the soil samples ranges from 146.86 to 12,549.81, with an average of 1107.18, indicating a high overall ecological risk in the study area (Table 4).
The percentage of potential ecological risk in different grades for each of the heavy metal(oid)s is shown in Table 5. For Cd in all sampling sites, 0.73%, 15.33%, and 83.94% of the sites had considerable risk, high risk, and very high potential ecological risk, respectively. For Pb, 91.97% had low risk, 2.19% had moderate risk, 5.11% had considerable risk, and 0.73% of the sites had high risk. For As, 1.46% had moderate risk. Conversely, the potential ecological risks of Zn, Cu, Ni, Cr, Co, and V in all soil samples were low risk (Table 5). These results indicate that Cd in soil posed the greatest risk to the ecosystem in the study area.
Based on the PER values pertaining to heavy metal(oid)s, it was observed that 40.15%, 51.09%, and 8.03% of the soil samples were associated with high, considerable, and moderate risks, respectively. The total of these three risk levels amounted to 99.27%, thereby suggesting that nearly all the soil within the study area has been exposed to some degree of hazard. Additionally, the contribution rate of Cd to PER in the soil samples ranged from 84.51% to 98.57%, with an average of 92.42%. This underscores the fact that Cd is the primary contaminant present in soils surrounding the smelter.
According to the spatial distribution of PER around the smelter (Figure 3), the northeast corner of the study area is a low potential ecological risk area, with the PER less than 150, accounting for 0.44% of the total area. This region is situated at a considerable distance from the smelter and has no other industrial facilities in its vicinity. In contrast, moderate, high, and significantly high potential ecological risk areas accounted for 5.71%, 68.78%, and 25.07% of the study area, respectively, as illustrated in Table 6. The spatial distribution of PER reveals that the areas with significantly high potential ecological risk are primarily concentrated in an oval-shaped region within a 1.5 km radius of the smelter, which closely resembles the spatial distribution of Cd in the study area. Furthermore, the polluted soils with significantly high and high PER covered approximately 93.84% of all the investigated regions, as shown in Figure 3.

3.4. Multivariate Analysis

3.4.1. PCA

The findings of the PCA are presented in Figure 4. The primary component, which accounts for 60.08% of the overall variance, can be attributed to anthropogenic activities, as evidenced by the substantial factor loadings of Cd, Pb, Cu, and Zn. It is worth noting that Cd, Pb, and Zn are frequently co-present in Pb/Zn ores and are easily emitted during the smelting process [51]. The secondary component explains 26.26% of the total variance, with notable factor loadings of Co, Cr, Ni, and V. The prominent factor loadings of Cr and Ni are indicative of other industrial sources rather than the smelter. Given that lithogenic Cr and Ni are commonly found in primary minerals, the second component may signify the soil’s primary mineral factor.
Based on the PCA outcomes (Figure 4), in the coordinate system established by principal component 1 and principal component 2, the cluster of elements comprising Pb, Cd, Zn, Cu, and As is evidently distinguished from the cluster of Co, Cr, Ni, and V. It can be inferred that the former elements present in the topsoil are subject to anthropogenic influences, in addition to natural factors, while the latter elements are found to be in proximity to the natural background values in the corresponding region [52].

3.4.2. Cluster Analysis (CA)

A CA was conducted to validate the outcomes of the PCA on heavy metal(oid)s (Figure 5). Generally speaking, the results of the CA demonstrated a high degree of agreement with those of the PCA analysis [53]. Two distinctive clusters were identified in the dendrograms for these metals in soils. Cluster I consisted of Pb-Cd-Zn-Cu-As, which comprised three sub-clusters: Pb-Cd, Zn-Cu, and As. Cu, Pb, and Zn are frequently associated elements and are normally detected in industrial emissions, suggesting that these elements have multiple anthropogenic/lithogenic sources [54]. All of these metals exhibited mean concentrations that were significantly higher than the background levels near the smelter. Cluster II included Cr-Co-V-Ni and only one sub-cluster. Significantly dissimilar Euclidean distances were observed between the two integrated clusters, possibly indicating different sources. The findings presented in Section 3.2 suggest that Pb, Cd, Zn, Cu, and As in the soil within the study area were primarily released by smelters, while Cr, Co, V, and Ni were mainly influenced by traffic, and fertilizer and other types of industrial plants. The results in this study are similar to the two PCA clusters in the southern part of the Nile Delta [23].

4. Conclusions

The soil in the study area was severely contaminated with heavy metal(oid)s, with an over-standard rate of 94.89% for Cd, 8.03% for Pb, and 10.22% for As. According to the distribution of different heavy metal(oid)s in soils, the concentration of Cd and Pb in soil decreases gradually with the increase of distance from the smelter to the surrounding area, showing an oval distribution, which accords with the typical air pollution diffusion model. Moreover, the distribution of Zn, Cu, and As was similar to Cd and Pb. However, Ni, V, Cr, and Co concentrations were mainly effected by factories and the soil parent materials. The potential ecological risk of Cd was higher than that of the other elements, mainly due to the extremely high risk while the risk grades of the other eight elements had a generally low risk. The polluted soils with significantly high and high potential ecological risk covered 93.84% of all the studied regions. Through PCA and CA analysis, it was found that Pb, Cd, Zn, Cu, and As were mainly attributable to human factors, via smelter emissions, with a contribution rate of 60.08%. Conversely, Co, Cr, Ni, and V are mainly caused by nature, with a contribution rate of 26.26%.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.Y. and Y.W.; methodology, S.G.; investigation, J.L. and Y.J.; data curation, R.S.; writing—original draft preparation, L.Y. and X.R.; writing—review and editing, Y.W. and Y.I. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the Open Funding Project of the National Key Laboratory of Human Factors Engineering (6142222211001, 614222210022213); the Key Project of the Science and Technology Research of Henan Provincial Department of Education (23A610013); Natural Science Foundation of Henan Province (202300410088); Innovation Demonstration Project of Henan Province (201111211400).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Khan, S.; Naushad, M.; Lima, E.C.; Zhang, S.; Shaheen, S.M.; Rinklebe, J. Global Soil Pollution by Toxic Elements: Current Status and Future Perspectives On the Risk Assessment and Remediation Strategies—A Review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 417, 126039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Kumar, M.; Seth, A.; Singh, A.K.; Rajput, M.S.; Sikandar, M. Remediation Strategies for Heavy Metals Contaminated Ecosystem: A Review. Environ. Sustain. Indic. 2021, 12, 100155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Xiao, R.; Guo, D.; Ali, A.; Mi, S.; Liu, T.; Ren, C.; Li, R.; Zhang, Z. Accumulation, Ecological-Health Risks Assessment, and Source Apportionment of Heavy Metals in Paddy Soils: A Case Study in Hanzhong, Shaanxi, China. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 248, 349–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Binner, H.; Sullivan, T.; Jansen, M.A.K.; McNamara, M.E. Metals in Urban Soils of Europe: A Systematic Review. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 854, 158734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Li, F.; Cai, Y.; Zhang, J. Spatial Characteristics, Health Risk Assessment and Sustainable Management of Heavy Metals and Metalloids in Soils From Central China. Sustainability 2018, 10, 91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Abed, R.M.M.; Al-Kindi, S. Effect of Disturbance by Oil Pollution On the Diversity and Activity of Bacterial Communities in Biological Soil Crusts From the Sultanate of Oman. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2017, 110, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Shahid, M.; Khan, M.S. Ecotoxicological Implications of Residual Pesticides to Beneficial Soil Bacteria: A Review. Pest. Biochem. Physiol. 2022, 188, 105272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhao, L.; Pan, Z.; Sun, B.; Sun, Y.; Weng, L.; Li, X.; Ye, H.; Ye, J.; Pan, X.; Zhou, B.; et al. Responses of Soil Microbial Communities to Concentration Gradients of Antibiotic Residues in Typical Greenhouse Vegetable Soils. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 855, 158587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Jin, J.; Zhao, X.; Zhang, L.; Hu, Y.; Zhao, J.; Tian, J.; Ren, J.; Lin, K.; Cui, C. Heavy Metals in Daily Meals and Food Ingredients in the Yangtze River Delta and their Probabilistic Health Risk Assessment. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 854, 158713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yang, Q.; Zhang, L.; Wang, H.; Martín, J.D. Bioavailability and Health Risk of Toxic Heavy Metals (as, Hg, Pb and Cd) in Urban Soils: A Monte Carlo Simulation Approach. Environ. Res. 2022, 214, 113772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Guo, G.; Li, K.; Lei, M. Accumulation, Environmental Risk Characteristics and Associated Driving Mechanisms of Potential Toxicity Elements in Roadside Soils Across China. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 835, 155342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Liu, Q.; Shi, H.; An, Y.; Ma, J.; Zhao, W.; Qu, Y.; Chen, H.; Liu, L.; Wu, F. Source, Environmental Behavior and Potential Health Risk of Rare Earth Elements in Beijing Urban Park Soils. J. Hazard. Mater. 2023, 445, 130451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Ahamad, A.; Janardhana Raju, N.; Madhav, S.; Gossel, W.; Ram, P.; Wycisk, P. Potentially Toxic Elements in Soil and Road Dust Around Sonbhadra Industrial Region, Uttar Pradesh, India: Source Apportionment and Health Risk Assessment. Environ. Res. 2021, 202, 111685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Aponte, H.; Mondaca, P.; Santander, C.; Meier, S.; Paolini, J.; Butler, B.; Rojas, C.; Diez, M.C.; Cornejo, P. Enzyme Activities and Microbial Functional Diversity in Metal(Loid) Contaminated Soils Near to a Copper Smelter. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 779, 146423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ke, W.; Zeng, J.; Zhu, F.; Luo, X.; Feng, J.; He, J.; Xue, S. Geochemical Partitioning and Spatial Distribution of Heavy Metals in Soils Contaminated by Lead Smelting. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 307, 119486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Zeng, J.; Luo, X.; Cheng, Y.; Ke, W.; Hartley, W.; Li, C.; Jiang, J.; Zhu, F.; Xue, S. Spatial Distribution of Toxic Metal(Loid)S at an Abandoned Zinc Smelting Site, Southern China. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 425, 127970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ekrami, E.; Pouresmaieli, M.; Hashemiyoon, E.S.; Noorbakhsh, N.; Mahmoudifard, M. Nanotechnology: A Sustainable Solution for Heavy Metals Remediation. Environ. Nanotechnol. Monit. Manag. 2022, 18, 100718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Song, P.; Xu, D.; Yue, J.; Ma, Y.; Dong, S.; Feng, J. Recent Advances in Soil Remediation Technology for Heavy Metal Contaminated Sites: A Critical Review. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 838, 156417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wu, S.; Liu, Y.; Southam, G.; Robertson, L.; Chiu, T.H.; Cross, A.T.; Dixon, K.W.; Stevens, J.C.; Zhong, H.; Chan, T.; et al. Geochemical and Mineralogical Constraints in Iron Ore Tailings Limit Soil Formation for Direct Phytostabilization. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 651, 192–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zhang, L.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Li, X.; Wang, Y. Investigation of Phosphate Removal Mechanisms by a Lanthanum Hydroxide Adsorbent Using P-Xrd, Ftir and Xps. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2021, 557, 149838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chen, H.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Z.; Wu, Z.; Chu, X.; Qing, S.; Xu, L.; Yang, K.; Meng, Q.; Cheng, H.; et al. Effects of Salinity on Anoxic–Oxic System Performance, Microbial Community Dynamics and Co-Occurrence Network During Treating Wastewater. Chem. Eng. J. 2023, 461, 141969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zhou, Z.; Peng, C.; Liu, X.; Jiang, Z.; Guo, Z.; Xiao, X. Pollution and Risk Assessments of Heavy Metal(Loid)S in the Soil Around Lead-Zinc Smelteries Via Data Integration Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Saleh, A.; Dawood, Y.H.; Gad, A. Assessment of Potentially Toxic Elements’ Contamination in the Soil of Greater Cairo, Egypt Using Geochemical and Magnetic Attributes. Land 2022, 11, 319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Gil-Loaiza, J.; Field, J.P.; White, S.A.; Csavina, J.; Felix, O.; Betterton, E.A.; Saez, A.E.; Maier, R.M. Phytoremediation Reduces Dust Emissions From Metal(Loid)-Contaminated Mine Tailings. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 52, 5851–5858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Shen, F.; Liao, R.; Ali, A.; Mahar, A.; Guo, D.; Li, R.; Xining, S.; Awasthi, M.K.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, Z. Spatial Distribution and Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals in Soil Near a Pb/Zn Smelter in Feng County, China. Ecotox. Environ. Safe 2017, 139, 254–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Luo, J.; Xing, W.; Ippolito, J.A.; Zhao, L.; Han, K.; Wang, Y.; Qiu, K.; Li, L. Bioaccessibility, Source and Human Health Risk of Pb, Cd, Cu and Zn in Windowsill Dusts From an Area Affected by Long-Term Pb Smelting. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 842, 156707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Yu, D.; Wang, J.; Wang, Y.; Du, X.; Li, G.; Li, B. Identifying the Source of Heavy Metal Pollution and Apportionment in Agricultural Soils Impacted by Different Smelters in China by the Positive Matrix Factorization Model and the Pb Isotope Ratio Method. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ran, H.; Deng, X.; Guo, Z.; Hu, Z.; An, Y.; Xiao, X.; Yi, L.; Xu, R. Pollution Characteristics and Environmental Availability of Toxic Elements in Soil From an Abandoned Arsenic-Containing Mine. Chemosphere 2022, 303, 135189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Carvalho, F.; Tavares, T.; Lins, L. Soil Contamination by a Lead Smelter in Brazil in the View of the Local Residents. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tang, L.; Tang, C.; Xiao, J.; Zeng, P.; Tang, M.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, Z. A Cleaner Process for Lead Recovery From Lead-Containing Hazardous Solid Waste and Zinc Leaching Residue Via Reducing-Matting Smelting. J. Clean Prod. 2019, 241, 118328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Li, L.; Zhang, Y.; Ippolito, J.; Xing, W.; Qiu, k.; Yang, H. Lead smelting effects heavy metal concentrations in soils, wheat, and potentially humans. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 257, 113641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Wu, J.; Long, J.; Liu, L.; Li, J.; Liao, H.; Zhang, M.; Zhao, C.; Wu, Q. Risk Assessment and Source Identification of Toxic Metals in the Agricultural Soil Around a Pb/Zn Mining and Smelting Area in Southwest China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Jo, H.; Kim, G.; Chang, J.; Lee, K.; Lee, C.; Lee, B. Chronic Exposure to Lead and Cadmium in Residents Living Near a Zinc Smelter. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Liu, H.; Zhou, J.; Li, M.; Obrist, D.; Wang, X.; Zhou, J. Chemical Speciation of Trace Metals in Atmospheric Deposition and Impacts On Soil Geochemistry and Vegetable Bioaccumulation Near a Large Copper Smelter in China. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 413, 125346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Ćwieląg-Drabek, M.; Piekut, A.; Gut, K.; Grabowski, M. Risk of Cadmium, Lead and Zinc Exposure From Consumption of Vegetables Produced in Areas with Mining and Smelting Past. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 3363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Cheng, Q.; Guo, Y.; Wang, W.; Hao, S. Spatial Variation of Soil Quality and Pollution Assessment of Heavy Metals in Cultivated Soils of Henan Province, China. Chem. Speciat. Bioavailab. 2014, 26, 184–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Chen, H.; Wu, W.; Cao, L.; Zhou, X.; Guo, R.; Nie, L.; Shang, W. Source Analysis and Contamination Assessment of Potentially Toxic Element in Soil of Small Watershed in Mountainous Area of Southern Henan, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Cao, J.; Xie, C.; Hou, Z. Ecological Evaluation of Heavy Metal Pollution in the Soil of Pb-Zn Mines. Ecotoxicology 2022, 31, 259–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Liu, Y.; Cui, J.; Peng, Y.; Lu, Y.; Yao, D.; Yang, J.; He, Y. Atmospheric Deposition of Hazardous Elements and its Accumulation in Both Soil and Grain of Winter Wheat in a Lead-Zinc Smelter Contaminated Area, Central China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 707, 135789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Adams, M.L.; Zhao, F.J.; McGrath, S.P.; Nicholson, F.A.; Chambers, B.J. Predicting Cadmium Concentrations in Wheat and Barley Grain Using Soil Properties. J. Environ. Qual. 2004, 33, 532–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. IUSS Working Group WRB. World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014, Update 2015. In International Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  42. Bi, L.; Yao, S.; Zhang, B. Impacts of Long-Term Chemical and Organic Fertilization On Soil Puddlability in Subtropical China. Soil Tillage Res. 2015, 152, 94–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yang, L.; Ren, Q.; Zheng, K.; Jiao, Z.; Ruan, X.; Wang, Y. Migration of Heavy Metals in the Soil-Grape System and Potential Health Risk Assessment. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 806, 150646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Ruan, X.; Ge, S.; Jiao, Z.; Zhan, W.; Wang, Y. Bioaccumulation and Risk Assessment of Potential Toxic Elements in the Soil-Vegetable System as Influenced by Historical Wastewater Irrigation. Agric. Water Manag. 2023, 279, 108197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hakanson, L. An Ecological Risk Index for Aquatic Pollution Control.a Sedimentological Approach. Water Res. 1980, 14, 975–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Suresh, G.; Sutharsan, P.; Ramasamy, V.; Venkatachalapathy, R. Assessment of Spatial Distribution and Potential Ecological Risk of the Heavy Metals in Relation to Granulometric Contents of Veeranam Lake Sediments, India. Ecotox. Environ. Safe 2012, 84, 117–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Mohajane, C.; Manjoro, M. Sediment-Associated Heavy Metal Contamination and Potential Ecological Risk Along an Urban River in South Africa. Heliyon 2022, 8, e12499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Li, S.; Zhao, B.; Jin, M.; Hu, L.; Zhong, H.; He, Z. A Comprehensive Survey On the Horizontal and Vertical Distribution of Heavy Metals and Microorganisms in Soils of a Pb/Zn Smelter. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 400, 123255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Environmental Monitoring of China. Background Values of Soil Elements in China; China Environmental Science Press: Beijing, China, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  50. Hammam, A.A.; Mohamed, W.S.; Sayed, S.E.; Kucher, D.E.; Mohamed, E.S. Assessment of Soil Contamination Using Gis and Multi-Variate Analysis: A Case Study in El-Minia Governorate, Egypt. Agronomy 2022, 12, 1197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Duan, G.; Zhang, H.; Liu, Y.; Jia, Y.; Hu, Y.; Cheng, W. Long-Term Fertilization with Pig-Biogas Residues Results in Heavy Metal Accumulation in Paddy Field and Rice Grains in Jiaxing of China. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2012, 58, 637–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Li, P.; Lin, C.; Cheng, H.; Duan, X.; Lei, K. Contamination and Health Risks of Soil Heavy Metals Around a Lead/Zinc Smelter in Southwestern China. Ecotox. Environ. Safe. 2015, 113, 391–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Yuan, G.; Sun, T.; Han, P.; Li, J. Environmental Geochemical Mapping and Multivariate Geostatistical Analysis of Heavy Metals in Topsoils of a Closed Steel Smelter: Capital Iron & Steel Factory, Beijing, China. J. Geochem. Explor. 2013, 130, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Radomirovic, M.; Ćirović, Ž.; Maksin, D.; Bakić, T.; Lukić, J.; Stankovic, S.; Onjia, A. Ecological Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals in the Soil at a Former Painting Industry Facility. Front. Environ. Sci. 2020, 8, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Location of the study area and the sampling sites.
Figure 1. Location of the study area and the sampling sites.
Toxics 11 00427 g001
Figure 2. The spatial distribution of heavy metal(oid)s in topsoil near the Pb/Zn smelter.
Figure 2. The spatial distribution of heavy metal(oid)s in topsoil near the Pb/Zn smelter.
Toxics 11 00427 g002
Figure 3. Distribution of grades on PER of heavy metal(oid)s in soil. (The black triangle represents the location of the smelter.)
Figure 3. Distribution of grades on PER of heavy metal(oid)s in soil. (The black triangle represents the location of the smelter.)
Toxics 11 00427 g003
Figure 4. PCA loading 2-D plot (PC1 vs. PC2) for nine heavy metal(oid)s.
Figure 4. PCA loading 2-D plot (PC1 vs. PC2) for nine heavy metal(oid)s.
Toxics 11 00427 g004
Figure 5. Hierarchical clustering of heavy metal(oid)s in soil near the smelter.
Figure 5. Hierarchical clustering of heavy metal(oid)s in soil near the smelter.
Toxics 11 00427 g005
Table 1. Risk grade indexes and grades of PER of heavy metal pollution.
Table 1. Risk grade indexes and grades of PER of heavy metal pollution.
ErRisk GradePERRisk Grade
<40Low potential ecological risk150Low potential ecological risk
40–80Moderate potential ecological risk150–300Moderate potential ecological risk
80–160Considerable potential ecological risk300–600High potential ecological risk
160–320High potential ecological risk>600Significantly high potential ecological risk
320Significantly high potential ecological risk -
Table 2. Descriptive statistic of selected soil chemical properties (n = 137).
Table 2. Descriptive statistic of selected soil chemical properties (n = 137).
pHTN (%)OM (%)CEC (cmol/kg)Fe (g/kg)
Mean8.560.212.5622.9126.03
SD0.160.140.804.696.95
Median8.560.182.5522.8226.33
Kurtosis0.269.446.500.020.10
Skewness−0.072.541.69−0.160.28
Min8.130.020.769.3511.03
Max9.110.966.3232.3949.78
CV(%)1.8968.4131.1120.480.03
SD: standard deviation; CV: coefficient of variation; OM: organic matter content; CEC: cation exchange capacity; TN: total nitrogen.
Table 3. Descriptive statistic of heavy metal(oid)s contents in the soils (n = 137).
Table 3. Descriptive statistic of heavy metal(oid)s contents in the soils (n = 137).
AsCdCoCrCuNiPbVZn
Mean (mg/kg)17.342.615.97101.0718.289.3167.2645.9572.18
SD (mg/kg)6.594.293.9124.9412.764.19112.8416.0628.94
Median (mg/kg)16.961.2116.19103.4815.049.3430.9547.5764.26
Min (mg/kg)5.910.327.0642.024.920.259.338.5723.29
Max (mg/kg)49.0730.3627.32175.9587.9320.9746.5592.6173.86
CV (%)37.99165.1824.4924.6769.8145.06167.7734.9640.1
Background value a (mg/kg)11.40.0741063.819.726.719.658.460.1
Exceeded background (%)83.94100.0093.4393.4326.28085.423.3659.85
Screening values b (mg/kg)250.6-250100190170-300
Exceeded screening (%)10.2294.89-0008.03-0
SD: standard deviation; CV: coefficient of variation. a Background values of soil elements in Henan Province [49]. b The risk screening values for agricultural land are cited from the national standard of China (GB 15618-2018).
Table 4. Descriptive statistic of Er for individual metal(oid)s and PER for all metal(oid)s (n = 137).
Table 4. Descriptive statistic of Er for individual metal(oid)s and PER for all metal(oid)s (n = 137).
ErRangeMeanSD
As5.19–43.0515.215.78
Cd128.71–12,306.201054.161741.21
Co3.53–13.667.981.95
Cr1.32–5.523.170.78
Cu1.25–22.324.643.24
Ni0.06–4.72.090.94
Pb2.38–190.4517.1628.79
V0.29–3.171.570.55
Zn0.39–2.891.20.48
PER146.86–12,549.811107.181776.33
Table 5. Grade of potential ecological risk (Er) for each heavy metal(oid)s (%).
Table 5. Grade of potential ecological risk (Er) for each heavy metal(oid)s (%).
Heavy MetalLow RiskModerate RiskConsiderable RiskHigh RiskVery High Risk
As98.541.46000
Cd000.7315.3383.94
Co1000000
Cr1000000
Cu1000000
Ni1000000
Pb91.972.195.110.730
V1000000
Zn1000000
PER0.738.0351.0940.15-
Table 6. The area cover ratio of different PER risk grades.
Table 6. The area cover ratio of different PER risk grades.
PERRisk GradeCover Ratio %
150Low potential ecological risk0.44
150–300Moderate potential ecological risk5.71
300–600High potential ecological risk68.78
>600Significantly high potential ecological risk25.07
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yang, L.; Ge, S.; Liu, J.; Iqbal, Y.; Jiang, Y.; Sun, R.; Ruan, X.; Wang, Y. Spatial Distribution and Risk Assessment of Heavy Metal(oid)s Contamination in Topsoil around a Lead and Zinc Smelter in Henan Province, Central China. Toxics 2023, 11, 427. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11050427

AMA Style

Yang L, Ge S, Liu J, Iqbal Y, Jiang Y, Sun R, Ruan X, Wang Y. Spatial Distribution and Risk Assessment of Heavy Metal(oid)s Contamination in Topsoil around a Lead and Zinc Smelter in Henan Province, Central China. Toxics. 2023; 11(5):427. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11050427

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yang, Ling, Shiji Ge, Jinhui Liu, Younas Iqbal, Yuling Jiang, Ruiling Sun, Xinling Ruan, and Yangyang Wang. 2023. "Spatial Distribution and Risk Assessment of Heavy Metal(oid)s Contamination in Topsoil around a Lead and Zinc Smelter in Henan Province, Central China" Toxics 11, no. 5: 427. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11050427

APA Style

Yang, L., Ge, S., Liu, J., Iqbal, Y., Jiang, Y., Sun, R., Ruan, X., & Wang, Y. (2023). Spatial Distribution and Risk Assessment of Heavy Metal(oid)s Contamination in Topsoil around a Lead and Zinc Smelter in Henan Province, Central China. Toxics, 11(5), 427. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11050427

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop