Toxic
metals in the deposited particles from air of the training space of Amir Abad
Campus, University of Birjand, 2012
Rezaei
MR, PhD1, Sayadi MH, PhD 1*
1- Assistant Prof., Natural Resource and
Environment School, University of Birjand, Birjand, Iran.
Abstract
Received: April 2014, Accepted: July 2014
|
Background: Composition of dust in the air due to
contact with human via inhalation,
ingestion and skin absorption will have a large impact on public health. In
the learning environments such as universities, many people spend most of
their day in contact with the dust. The purpose of this study was to evaluate
the concentration of heavy metals; lead, chromium and copper in the training
space of the University of Birjand (Faculty of Agriculture and Natural
Resources) and examining
its ecological risks.
Materials and Methods: This descriptive study
evaluated a total of 16 samples where 4 samples pertained to the Faculty of
Natural Resources and Environment and 12 samples were from the Faculty of
Agriculture. For estimation of the heavy metals; copper, chromium and lead,
hydrochloric acid and nitric acid digestion were used. The concentration of
heavy metals was measured using an atomic absorption instrument. The regression coefficient was calculated by Ms Excle
software.
Results: The results showed that lead (3.414) and
copper (14.884) degrees in the official room of the Faculty of Agriculture
was more than the Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment while lead
(2.575) and chromium (0.187) degrees were higher in the classrooms of the
Faculty of Natural Resources. The regression correlation coefficient studies
showed that the case study heavy metals had week correlation(R2;
0.13 and 0.20) . The pollution
index of the element chromium depicted the lowest pollution level and copper
had the high pollution levels in some samples.
Conclusions: However, the samples exhibited little
ecological risks. Thus, the presence of these elements in dust does not lead
to serious health hazards. Nevertheless, further studies at different time
periods are worthwhile.
|
Keywords: Dust, Heavy metals, Risk
Introduction
Aerosols arise from
natural and human-induced activities and after the passage of required time, with
subjection to size and density drop down on the surfaces. On average each
individual inhales 10 cubic meters of air into his or her lungs; nevertheless
investigating the available compositions in the air particles has a greater
importance on the human health. The results of some studies indicate that the
air dust contains traces of heavy metals such as lead, chromium, nickel,
copper, cadmium, manganese and zinc (1). The results of the researchcarried out
on air dust in Turkey demonstrated that the mean concentration of lead in street dust was 9 to 11 times greater
than in the soil. In the case of copper and cadmium, the mean concentration of
these pollutants in street dust doubled in relation to their concentration in
the soil and this value in the case of lead was also 9 to 12 times higher (1).
In a study in southern
China on the dust deposited in various environments such as school campuses
showed that the concentrations of lead, zinc, chromium and cadmium was 80 to
1000, 700 to 800, 30-50 and 5-10 mg respectively (2). The study results of
Salman Zadeh and colleagues in 2011, which was on the deposition of dust in
Tehran showed high concentration of metals; cadmium, zinc, copper, lead, iron,
chromium and nickel as compared to the mean concentration of metals found in
the earths crust (3) and the study carried out in the city of Zanjan revealed
that the mean precipitation of heavy metals in the air dust was 0.082 for zinc,
0.286 for lead, cadmium – 0.018 and chromium – 0.009 milligrams per kilogram (4).
These pollutants have the
accumulation-able property which leads to exposure of numerous health and environmental
issues. For this reason the heavy metals concentration in urban dust is often
used as an indicator of heavy metal pollution of the environment (5). It is
noteworthy that in the dust concentration phenomenon of some heavy metals such
as lead it triples. Even, the concentration of toxic metals; mercury and
arsenic can increase to a considerable level (6).
Heavy metals are considered
as toxic metals that are non-biodegradable, thus in optimal values they
threaten the biological life (7). Annually 800,000 individuals suffer from premature
death due to cardiovascular, respiratory diseases and lung cancer caused by air
pollution (8). Also, some of the diseases are caused or exacerbated by the
effects of dust. Direct inhalation of the fine particles can cause or aggravate
diseases such as bronchitis, emphysema, and silicosis (9).
The presence of heavy
metals in the dust leads to increase of these elements in the human body
through inhalation, ingestion and skin absorption in a manner that each human
being inhales over 100 mg of dust a day into his or her body (10, 11). Exposure
to the dust containing heavy metals can cause issues such as physical and
mental retardation, reduced IQ, poor concentration, headaches, cancer, high
blood pressure, general weakness, kidney and liver problems, dys function of
the nervous system and interferes with the normal functioning of internal
organs or subjects to the aggravated effects of other diseases and in few cases
leads to death (12, 11). Due to the increasing severity of air
pollution, especially particulate matter in recent years and adverse effects of
dust containing heavy metals on the health of students, faculties and staffs of
the university, the need for the investigation of this project was felt.
The purpose of this study
was to evaluate the concentration of heavy metals; lead, chromium and copper in
the training space of the University of Birjand (Faculty of Agriculture and
Natural Resources) and its ecological risk was also investigated.
Materials and Methods
The study area was Faculty
of Agriculture and Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, located in
Amir Abad campus, University of Birjand. In the Faculty of Agriculture, 1386
students, 52 faculty members and 60 administrative personnel are working and in
the Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, 356 students, 9 faculty
members and 19 administrative personnel are functioning.
This descriptive study
evaluated the toxic heavy metals in the training space in 2012. The sampling was carried
out from all the places and in locations with similar conditions, the samples
were combined wherein, among total 16 samples, 4 samples related to the Faculty
of Natural Resources and Environment with an average area of 200 square meters
and 12 samples pertained to the Faculty of Agriculture with an average area of
3000 square meters.
The sampling was conducted
using a broom or vacuum. Later, the samples were stored in the special bags and
immediately transferred to the laboratory. After sieving the samples, dusts
with a diameter less than 63 microns were analyzed.
For the measurement of
heavy metals; copper, chromium and lead, the hydrochloric and nitric digestion
acids were utilized (13). The concentration of heavy metals was measured using an
atomic absorption instrument (ContrAA700 of Analytik Jena Company, Germany).
Moreover, the regression correlation coefficient was used to determine the
coefficient by Ms Excel software at 0.01 levels. To obtain the ecological risk of
the case study heavy metals the following formula was used (14).
Formula Number 1
Formula Number 2 
Formula Number 3 
Where P1 is pollution
factor, Cs is the concentration of heavy elements in the present study and Bn
is the background values of heavy elements, Er is the ecological risk of each
element and RI represents sum of the ecological risks of the elements. Hakanson
proposed Tr level, which is heavy metals toxicity factor and is 5, 5 and 2 for
copper, lead and chromium respectively.
The ecological risk values
obtained were classified into four groups in a manner that the R1 level lower
than 150 is low ecological risk, equal and or more than 150 to 300 medium,
equal and or more than 300 to 600 significant risk and if equal or greater than
600 the ecological risk would be too high.
Results
The mean analysis results of
the three pollutant elements; chromium, lead and copper samples were separately
studied in the Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment and Agriculture at
different places and are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Mean concentrations
of heavy elements mg in kg in different places of segregated faculties
|
Faculty Natural Resources and Environment
|
Faculty of agriculture
|
|
Place
|
Cr
|
Pb
|
Cu
|
Cr
|
Pb
|
Cu
|
|
Official room
|
0.583
|
2.012
|
4.754
|
0.380
|
3.414
|
14.884
|
|
Classroom
|
0.187
|
2.575
|
18.105
|
0.034
|
2.160
|
24.646
|
|
Professor room
|
0.003
|
6.602
|
7.818
|
0.207
|
2.787
|
19.765
|
As shown in the Table 1,
the level of lead (3.414) and copper (14.884) in the official room of the
Faculty of Agriculture was higher than the Faculty of Natural Resources and
Environment. While the amount of lead (2.575) and chromium (0.187) was higher
than in the classrooms of the Faculty of Natural Resources. Level of lead
(6.602) in the professor room in the Faculty of Natural Resources and
Environment was more whereas the concentration of chromium (0.003) and copper
(7.818) were relatively less. Table 1 demonstrates mean concentrations results of
three pollutant elements; chromium, lead and copper related to the case study samples
in terms of measured locations. As Figure 1 depicts that professor room, classroom
and official room showed the highest lead, copper and chromium degrees.
Figure 1. Mean concentrations
of chromium, lead and copper in different places
Table 2: Maximum Minimum
Mean±SD of chromium, lead and copper in 16 samples
|
Cr
|
Pb
|
Cu
|
Mean
|
0.232
|
3.258
|
14.996
|
|
Max
|
0.839
|
9.521
|
41.72
|
|
Min
|
0.0004
|
0.41
|
3.057
|
|
Std
|
0.196
|
1.26
|
12.87
|
Table 2 demonstrates the
Maximum Minimum Mean±SD of concentrations of three pollutant elements;
chromium, lead and copper in the 16 samples of the case study. The maximum
degree of chromium and lead concentrations pertained to the professor room in
the Faculty of Agriculture while the maximum degree of copper was derived from
the classes in the Faculty of Agriculture.
Discussion
Table 3 shows the elements
concentration degree in the case study in comparison with the other studies.
Only, the lead and chromium degrees in Kartazna city of China was lower than
the studied samples and even the amount of copper in the dusts of Mashhad city
was lower than the present study while other cities in Iran and around the
world have substantial amounts of heavy metals. Even the concentration of heavy
metals in the earth’s crust except lead was higher than the present study.
Table-3 Comparison of the mean
of existing heavy metals in case study dusts with other parts mg/kg
|
City
|
Cr
|
Cu
|
Pb
|
|
Birjand, Iran (case study)
|
0.232
|
3.258
|
14.996
|
|
Mashhad, Iran (15)
|
-
|
0.69
|
169.65
|
|
Tehran, Iran (3)
|
33.3
|
222
|
254.4
|
|
Kartazna China (16)
|
0.02
|
-
|
2.5
|
|
Jordan, Oman (12)
|
18.32
|
249.6
|
976
|
|
Madrid, Spain (17)
|
61
|
188
|
1927
|
|
Ottawa, Canada (18)
|
59
|
188
|
68
|
|
Mean concentration of
heavy metals in the
earth’s crust (19)
|
100
|
50
|
14
|
Figure 2. Regression
correlation between the heavy elements
Regression correlation between heavy elements
As shown in Figure 2 the
case study heavy elements possess a relatively weak and positive correlation
which indicates that the pollutants are generated from multiple independent
sources. Among these elements, chromium and copper R2=0.207 depicted
the highest correlation among the elements. A study conducted by Salman Zadeh
and colleagues in 2012 in Tehran showed that there is a positive correlation
between copper, chromium and lead (3).
In a study conducted in
Zanjan, Farahmand Kia et al. (2010)
showed a positive correlation 0.61 between lead and chromium (4). Weak
correlation coefficient values for case study heavy elements may be due to
relatively low concentrations as compared to other studies (Figure 2).
Table
4: Pollution index of the sampled areas
|
Heavy elements pollution
index in the Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment
|
|
Place
|
Cr
|
Pb
|
Cu
|
|
Official room
|
0.056
|
0.389
|
0.494
|
|
Classroom 1
|
0.000
|
0.218
|
1.672
|
|
Classroom 2
|
0.036
|
0.778
|
2.093
|
|
Professor room
|
0.000
|
1.277
|
0.813
|
|
Heavy elements pollution
index in the Faculty of Agriculture
|
|
Place
|
Cr
|
Pb
|
Cu
|
|
Official room 1
|
0.057
|
0.710
|
1.754
|
|
Official room 2
|
0.046
|
0.645
|
0.998
|
|
Official room 3
|
0.007
|
0.626
|
1.890
|
|
Official room 4
|
0.000
|
0.579
|
0.791
|
|
Classroom 1
|
0.018
|
0.743
|
0.318
|
|
Classroom 2
|
0.000
|
0.679
|
2.813
|
|
Classroom 3
|
0.000
|
0.277
|
2.877
|
|
Classroom 4
|
0.001
|
0.079
|
4.236
|
|
Classroom 5
|
0.000
|
0.148
|
4.337
|
|
Classroom 6
|
0.063
|
1.842
|
2.156
|
|
Professor room 1
|
0.056
|
0.876
|
0.407
|
|
Professor room 2
|
0.081
|
0.500
|
0.792
|
|
Professor room 3
|
0.057
|
0.710
|
1.754
|
Pollution Index PI
In order to identify the
sources of pollutants in the case study, the pollution index factor was used.
As shown in the Formula 1 for its calculation there is a need of elements
background degree. In the different studies conducted worldwide, background
concentration of heavy metals is considered based on the previous studies. (20-23). Even in few studies the
concentration of heavy metals in the earth’s crust is used (24). Considering
that the heavy metals evaluations in the dust of University of Birjand and even
the city of Birjand has been studied for the first time and due to lack of
information, a part of the field from the west of Tehran city was undertaken
(25). The pollution index classified as below is presented in the Table 4.
PI≤1 Low pollution level
1<PI≤3 Moderate
pollution level
PI >3 High pollution level
As shown in Table 4,
considering element chromium, pollution level in all the sampled areas was low.
But the professor's rooms in the Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources
and Environment in terms of element lead had a moderate pollution level and in
the other areas was low. But the copper pollution level in the classes of
Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment was moderate, while the classrooms
5 and 6 of the Faculty of Agriculture exhibited high pollution levels and the
classrooms 3 and 4, official rooms 1 and 3 and professor room 1 demonstrated
moderate pollution level.
Ecological risk
Using Formula numbers 2
and 3, Er and RI values were calculated and the results are presented in the
Table 5. As shown in Table 5 effectually all the sampled areas showed a little
ecological risk. The highest ecological risk was associated with classroom
number 6 in the Faculty of Agriculture and the lowest risk belonged to the official
room of the Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment.
Table
5: Ecological Risk Index of heavy elements
|
Faculty of
Natural Resources and Environment
|
Er Cr
|
Er Pb
|
Er Cu
|
RI
|
Ecological risk
|
|
Official room
|
0.11
|
1.95
|
2.47
|
4.53
|
Low
|
|
Classroom 1
|
0.00
|
1.09
|
8.36
|
9.45
|
Low
|
|
Classroom 2
|
0.07
|
3.89
|
10.46
|
14.42
|
Low
|
|
Professor room
|
0.00
|
6.38
|
4.06
|
10.45
|
Low
|
|
Faculty of Agriculture
|
Er Cr
|
Er Pb
|
Er Cu
|
RI
|
Ecological risk
|
|
Official room 1
|
0.11
|
3.55
|
8.77
|
12.43
|
Low
|
|
Official room 2
|
0.09
|
3.23
|
4.99
|
8.31
|
Low
|
|
Official room 3
|
0.01
|
3.13
|
9.45
|
12.59
|
Low
|
|
Classroom 1
|
0.00
|
2.90
|
3.96
|
6.85
|
Low
|
|
Classroom 2
|
0.04
|
3.72
|
1.59
|
5.34
|
Low
|
|
Classroom 3
|
0.00
|
3.40
|
14.06
|
17.46
|
Low
|
|
Classroom 4
|
0.00
|
1.39
|
14.39
|
15.77
|
Low
|
|
Classroom 5
|
0.00
|
0.40
|
21.18
|
21.58
|
Low
|
|
Classroom 6
|
0.00
|
0.74
|
21.68
|
22.43
|
Low
|
|
Professor room 1
|
0.13
|
9.21
|
10.78
|
20.11
|
Low
|
|
Professor room 2
|
0.11
|
4.38
|
2.04
|
6.53
|
Low
|
|
Professor room 3
|
0.16
|
2.50
|
3.96
|
6.62
|
Low
|
Conclusion
In the present study, the
concentration of three heavy elements; lead, copper and chromium in 16 samples
of dust deposited in different locations in the Faculty of Agriculture and Faculty
of Natural Resources and Environment were evaluated. The pollution index and
ecological risk associated with the heavy metals were also determined. Considering
the conducted calculations and analysis the pollution index of element chromium
had the lowest pollution level and lead had the high pollution level in few
samples. Considering ecological risk calculations, all the stations
demonstrated a little risk. Thus it can be safely concluded that the presence
of these heavy elements in the dust do not cause serious health hazards.
However, further studies at different time periods seem necessary.
Acknowledgments
This study
was funded by the Research Council of University of Birjand which as a Research
Project was conducted in 2013. Authors appreciate the authorities of Research
Council and Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, University of
Birjand, due to their sincere cooperation. We also like to thank Dr. Mahavash
F. Kavian for editing the paper.
Conflict of interest: Non declared
References
1.
Sezgin N, Ozcan HK, Demir G, Nemlioglu S, Bayat C. Determination
of heavy metal concentration in street dusts in Istanbul E-5highway. Environ
Int 2004; 29(7):979-85.
2.
Leung AO, Duzgoren-Aydin NS, Cheung KC
, Wong MH. Heavy metals concentrations of
surface dust from e-waste recycling and its human health implications
in southeast china, Environ Sci Technol 2008; 42(7):2674-80.
3.
Salmanzadeh M, Saeedi M, Nabi Bidhendi G. Heavy metals pollution
in street dusts of Tehran and their ecological risk assessment. Journal of Environmental
Studies 2012; 38(61):4-6.
4.
Farahmand kia Z, Mehrasbi MR, Sekhawatju MS,
Hasanalizadeh ASH, Ramezanzadeh Z. Study of
heavy metals in the atmospheric deposition in Zanjan,
Iran. Iranian Journal of Health and Environment 2010; 2(4):240-9.
5.
Li X, Poon CS, Liu PS. Heavy metal contamination of
urban soils and street dusts in Hong Kong. Appl Geochem 2001; 16(11-12):1361–8.
6.
Nadafi K. Air pollution with emphasis on dust and
health effects and environmental. Paper presented at: Twelfth National
Conference on Environmental Health; 2009 November; Tehran, Iran.
7.
Tong ST, Lam KC. Home sweet home? A case study of
household dust contamination in Hong Kong. Sci Total
Environ 2000; 256(2-3):115-23.
8.
Curtis L, Rea W, Smith-Willis P, Fenyves E, Pan Y.
Advers health effects of outdoor air pollutants. Environ Int 2006;
32(6):815-30.
9.
Goudie AS, Middleton NJ (2006). Desert dust in the
global system: with 41 tables. Berlin & New York: Heidelberg & Springer.
PP:287.
10.
Sayadi MH, Torabi S. Geochemistry of soil and human
health: A review. Pollution Research 2009; 28(2):257-62.
11.
Murgueytio AM, Evans RG, Sterling D, Serrano F, Roberts D. Behaviors and blood lead
levels of children in a lead-mining area and a comparison community.
Journal of Environmental Health 1998; 60(6):14–20.
12.
Jiries A. Vehicular Contamination of Dust in Amman,
Jordan. Environmentalist 2003; 23(3):205-10.
13.
Burt R. Soil Survey Laboratory Methods Manual. Lincoln,
Nebraska: United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources
Conservation Service; 2004 Feb. Version 4.0. Soil Survey Investigation Report.
No; 42.
14.
Hakanson L. An
ecological risk index for aquatic pollution control. a sedimentological
approach. Water Res 1980; 14:975-1001.
15.
Behravesh F, Mahmoodi MH, Ghasemzadeh F, Avazmoghadam S.
The contamination of heavy metals in urban soils and traffic dust in Mashhad. Paper presented at: The First Geological
Congress of Iranian plateau; 2013 March 1-2; Kerman, Iran.
16.
Moreno-Grau S, Cascales-Pujalte JA, Martinez-Garcia MJ, Angosto J, Moreno J, Bayo J, et al. Relationship
between levels of lead, cadmium, zinc and copper in soil and
settleable particulate matter in Cartagena (Spain). Water Air
Soil Pollut 2002; 137(1-4):365–83.
17.
De Miguel E, Llamas JF, Chacón E, Berg T,
Larssen S, Røyset O, Vadset M. Origin
and patterns of distribution of trace elements in street dust: Unleaded petrol
and urban lead. Atmos Environ 1997; 31(17):2733-40.
18.
Rasmussen PE, Subramanian KS, Jessiman BJ. A
multi-element profile of housedust in relation to exterior dust and soils in
the city of Ottawa. Canada. Sci Total Environ 2001; 267(1-3):125-40.
19.
Karbassi AR, Nabi-Bidhendi GHR, Bayati I. Environmental
geochemistry of heavy metals in a sediment core off Bushehr Persian Gulf. Iranian
J Environ Health Sci Eng 2005; 2(4):225-60.
20.
Sayadi MH, Sayyed MR, Kumar S. Short-term accumulative
signatures of heavy metals in river bed sediments in the industrial area,
Tehran Iran. Environ Monit Assess 2010; 162(1-4):465–73.
21.
Sayadi MH, Sayyed MRG. Comparative assessment of baseline
concentration of the
heavy metals in the soils of Tehran (Iran) with the comprisable reference data.
Environ Earth Sci 2011; 63(6):1179-88.
22.
Sayadi MH, Rezaei MR. Impact of land use on the
distribution of toxic metals in surface soils in Birjand city, Iran. Proceedings
of the International Academy of Ecology & Environmen 2014; 4(1):18-29.
23.
Manasreh WA. Assessment of trace metals in street dust
of mutah city, Kurak, Jordan. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental
Sciences 2010; 5(1):5-12.
24.
Kartal S, Aydin Z, Takalioglu S. Fractionation of
metals in street sediment samples by using the BCR sequential extraction procedure
and multivariate statistical elucidation of the data. J Hazard Mater 2006;
132(1):80-9.
25.
Sayyed MRG, Sayadi MH. Variations in the heavy metal accumulations
within the surface soils from the chitgar industrial area of Tehran.
International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences 2011; 1(1):36-46.
Corresponding author: Mohammadhossein Sayadi, Natural Resource and
Environment School, University of Birjand, Birjand, Iran.
