
The exposure characteristic and health risk assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soils and tobacco plants
MA Jun, TAN Changyin, WANG Yong, WU Lanyan, QIN Hangdao
JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY ›› 2024, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (4) : 200-208.
The exposure characteristic and health risk assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soils and tobacco plants
【Objective】The aim of this research is to determine the exposure characteristic and health risk of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in soils and tobacco plants.【Method】Forty samples of soil and fresh tobacco plants were collected from tobacco-growing areas in Changping (CP), Taiping (TP), Pingtou (PT), Pujue (PJ), Panxin (PX) and Mengxi (MX) in Songtao County of Guizhou Province. A total of 16 PAH species were isolated from the samples. The characteristics of PAHs exposure were analyzed after ingestion, dermal administration, and inhalation. The carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health risks on farmers were assessed.【Result】The total contents of seven kinds of carcinogenic PAHs [perylene (Chr), benzo(a) anthracene (BaA), benzo(b) fluoranthene (BbF), benzo(k) fluoranthene (BkF), dibenzo(a,h)anthracene (DahA), benzo (a) pyrene (BaP), and indeno(1,2,3-cd) pyrene (IP)] in the soil and tobacco samples were 70.97-365.71 and 293.53-1 730.72 μg/kg, and the mean values were 221.13 and 707.03 μg/kg, respectively. The total contents of nine non-carcinogenic PAHs [naphthalene (Nap), anthracene (Ant), phenanthrene (Phe), pyrene (Pyr), acenaphthylene (Ane), diacenaphthylene (Any), fluorene (Flu), fluoranthene (Fla), and benzo (g,h,i) pyrene (BghiP)] were 65.6-647.6 and 108.9-606.1 μg/kg, and the mean values were 379.6 and 304.2 μg/kg, respectively. Analysis of the exposure characteristics of the PAHs revealed that ingestion>dermal>inhalation in terms of the exposure risk. The total average daily exposure of the farmers to the seven carcinogenic PAHs in the soil and tobacco samples was 54.41-280.38 and 225.04-1 326.87 pg/(kg·d), and the mean values were 169.53 and 542.05 pg/(kg·d), respectively. The total average daily exposure of the farmers to the nine non-carcinogenic PAHs in the soil and tobacco samples were 146.70-1448.19 and 243.41-1355.33 pg/(kg·d), and the mean values were 848.91 and 680.22 pg/(kg·d), respectively. The average daily intake (ADI) of the carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic PAHs was the highest in MX. The total non-carcinogenic risk index of the PAHs in the soil and tobacco samples to the farmers ranged from 8.39×10-7 to 5.14×10-6, with a mean value of 2.18×10-6. The total carcinogenic risk index of the PAHs to the farmers varied from 8.39×10-7 to 5.14×10-6, with a mean value of 2.18×10-6. The total carcinogenic risk index of BaP was the highest among the PAHs, being 3.69×10-7 to 4.25×10-6, with a mean value of 1.58×10-6. The levels of BaP exceeded the recommended threshold published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) at 26 sites (65%), and the total carcinogenic risk of the seven carcinogenic PAHs was low at 90% of the sampling sites.【Conclusion】Ingestion and dermal exposure were the main exposure routes of the PAHs in the soil and tobacco samples. The carcinogenic risk of the non-carcinogenic PAHs was below the critical value recommended by the USEPA, and their values were at acceptable range. The carcinogenic PAHs had a low health risk to farmers at the majority of sampling sites. However, the carcinogenic PAH, BaP, requires further attention.
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons / soils and tobacco / tobacco farmers / intake way / health risk assessment
[1] |
张俊叶, 俞菲, 杨靖宇, 等. 南京城市林业土壤多环芳烃累积特征及其与黑炭的相关性[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 42(2):75-80.
|
[2] |
|
[3] |
|
[4] |
|
[5] |
|
[6] |
|
[7] |
|
[8] |
|
[9] |
严青云, 杨耀帅, 罗海鲲, 等. 典型塑料生产加工地块土壤邻苯二甲酸酯及多环芳烃污染特征和健康风险[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2022, 41(2):357-366.
|
[10] |
|
[11] |
|
[12] |
|
[13] |
|
[14] |
马军, 滕应, 陆引罡, 等. 植烟土壤中16种多环芳烃的洗脱净化技术及含量测定[J]. 环境污染与防治, 2017, 39(3):258-262,267.
|
[15] |
马军, 滕应, 陆引罡, 等. 四通道色谱分离仪净化/气相色谱-质谱法测定烟叶中的多环芳烃[J]. 分析测试学报, 2016, 35(8):968-973.
|
[16] |
|
[17] |
|
[18] |
|
[19] |
|
[20] |
王飞, 赵颖. 太原市污灌区农田土壤中多环芳烃污染特征及生态风险评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(1):160-169.
|
[21] |
李文静, 李杨, 傅晓文, 等. 油田居住区土壤中多环芳烃污染特征与风险评价:以胜利油田为例[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2021, 21(22):9634-9643.
|
[22] |
张秀秀, 卢晓丽, 魏宇宸, 等. 城郊农田土壤多环芳烃污染特征及风险评价[J]. 环境科学, 2021, 42(11):5510-5518.
|
[23] |
|
[24] |
|
[25] |
|
[26] |
赵体跃, 龙明华, 乔双雨, 等. 广西水生蔬菜和陆生蔬菜多环芳烃污染特征[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2020, 36(4):505-514.
|
[27] |
葛蔚, 程琪琪, 柴超, 等. 青岛市城郊蔬菜中多环芳烃污染特征和健康风险评估[J]. 环境科学学报, 2017, 37(12):4772-4778.
|
[28] |
龙明华, 龙彪, 梁勇生, 等. 南宁市蔬菜基地土壤多环芳烃含量及来源分析[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2017(3):52-57.
|
[29] |
|
[30] |
|
[31] |
|
[32] |
|
[33] |
金修齐, 黄代宽, 赵书晗, 等. 松桃河流域氨氮和锰污染特征及生态风险评价[J]. 中国环境科学, 2021, 41(1):385-395.
|
[34] |
|
[35] |
齐晓宝, 黄沈发, 沙晨燕, 等. 钢铁工业区下风向土壤中多环芳烃污染特征及源解析[J]. 环境科学研究, 2018, 31(5):927-934.
|
[36] |
|
[37] |
|
[38] |
|
[39] |
|
[40] |
郭瑾, 葛蔚, 柴超, 等. 化学工业区周边土壤中多环芳烃含量、来源及健康风险评估[J]. 环境化学, 2018, 37(2):296-309.
|
/
〈 |
|
〉 |