4.7 Article

Ecotoxicological effects on Lemna minor and Daphnia magna of leachates from differently aged landfills of Ghana

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 698, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134295

关键词

Toxicity; Ghana; Landfill leachate; Leachate age; Aquatic organisms; Ecotoxicity

资金

  1. scientific internal grant agency of University of Chemistry and Technology (UCT) Prague

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Management of leachates generated by solid waste disposal is a very challenging aspect of landfill management in most parts of the world. In most developing countries, the leachates generated are discharged into the environment without treatment, leading to contamination of ground and surface waters and causing human health problems. Even though its potential risk has been established through chemical analyses, less work has been conducted on its effect on ecosystems. This study assessed the toxicity of leachates from three landfill sites of different ages from Ghana, namely Tema, Mallam and Oblogo, to aquatic organisms. Duckweed (Lemna minor) and crustaceans (Daphnia magna) toxicity tests were performed using exposures to concentrations of 625, 12.5, 25, 50 and 100 mL/L of the landfill leachates in control growth media. Physico-chemical properties of the leachates were also determined. The leachates from all the sites were toxic with IC 50 values ranging from 2.8 to 29.5%. The Oblogo landfill leachate (the oldest site) being most toxic to duckweed and Tema landfill leachate (the youngest site) most toxic to D. magna. Leachates characterized had varying concentrations of heavy metals (02-42.3 mg/L) with Cu and Cd below detectable limit. The organic component COD was below the permissible level (110-541 mg/L) and the TOC exceeded the permissible level (350-6920 mg/L). These result indicate that the age and other characteristics of the landfill sites contribute to the difference in the toxicity of the Ghana landfill leachates. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据