↓ Skip to main content

Heavy metal accumulation in soils and grains, and health risks associated with use of treated municipal wastewater in subsurface drip irrigation

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
Title
Heavy metal accumulation in soils and grains, and health risks associated with use of treated municipal wastewater in subsurface drip irrigation
Published in
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10661-015-4565-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kamran Asgari, Wim M. Cornelis

Abstract

Constant use of treated wastewater (TWW) for irrigation over prolonged periods may cause buildup of heavy metals up to toxic levels for plants and animals, and entails environmental hazards in different aspects. However, application of TWW on agricultural land might be an effective and sustainable strategy in arid and semi-arid countries where fresh water resources are under great pressure, as long as potential harmful effects on the environment including soil, plants, and fresh water resources, and health risks to humans are minimized. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of deep emitters on limiting potential heavy metal accumulation in soils and grains, and health risk under drip irrigation with treated municipal wastewater. A field experiment was conducted according to a split block design with two treatments (fresh and wastewater) and three sub-treatments (0, 15, and 30 cm depth of emitters) in four replicates on a sandy loam Calcic Argigypsids, in Esfahan, Iran. The annual rainfall is about 123 mm, mean annual ETo is 1457 mm, and the elevation is 1590 m above sea level. A two-crop rotation of wheat (Triticum spp.) and corn (Zea mays) was established on each plot with wheat growing from February to June and corn from July to September. Soil samples were collected before planting and after harvesting for each crop in each year. Edible grain samples of corn and wheat were collected at harvest. Elemental concentrations (Cu, Zn, Cd, Pb, Cr, Ni) in soil and grains were determined using an atomic absorption spectrophotometer. Results showed that the concentrations of heavy metals in the wastewater-irrigated soils were not significantly different (P > 0.05) compared with the freshwater-irrigated soils. No significant difference (P > 0.05) in heavy metal content in soil between different depths of emitters was found. A pollution load index (PLI) showed that there was no substantial buildup of heavy metals in the wastewater-irrigated soils compared to the freshwater-irrigated soils. Cu, Pb, and Zn concentrations in wheat and corn grains were within the permissible US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) limits, but concentrations of Cd (in wheat and corn) and Cr (in corn) were above the safe limits of the EPA. In addition, concentrations of Ni in wheat and corn seeds were several folds higher than the EPA standards. A health risk index (HRI) which is usually adopted to assess the health risk to hazard materials in foods showed values higher than 1 for Cd, particularly for wheat grain (HRI >2.5). Results also showed that intake of Cu through consumption of edible wheat grains posed a relatively high potential health risk to children (HRI >1.4), whereas children might also be exposed to health risk from Cd and Cr from corn grains (HRI >1.4). Based on aforementioned results, it can be concluded that the emitter depth in drip irrigation does not play a significant role in the accumulation of heavy metals from TWW in our sandy loam soil. Although their accumulation in the soil was limited and similar to using freshwater, uptake of Cd and Cr by wheat and corn was relatively large and hence resulted in health risk. The results suggest that more attention should be directed towards cultivation of other crops with drip irrigation system for a safe and more productive use of wastewater for irrigation. Alternatively, methods that filter the wastewater before it enters the soil environment might be an option that needs further investigation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 102 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 11%
Researcher 7 7%
Other 7 7%
Student > Master 7 7%
Other 22 22%
Unknown 30 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 21 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 13%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 7 7%
Unspecified 7 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 4%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 37 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 January 2016.
All research outputs
#21,358,731
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#2,266
of 2,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,769
of 269,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#36
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,748 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 269,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.