4.5 Article

Diel variation of selenium and arsenic in a wetland of the Great Salt Lake, Utah

期刊

APPLIED GEOCHEMISTRY
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 28-36

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeochem.2010.10.011

关键词

-

资金

  1. Utah Division of Water Quality
  2. US EPA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Diel (24-h) changes in Se and As concentrations in a freshwater wetland pond bordering the Great Salt Lake (GSL) were examined. Selenium concentrations (filtered and unfiltered) changed on a diel basis, i.e., were depleted during early morning and enriched during daytime over August 17-18. During the May 24-25, 2006 and September 29-30 diel studies, no significant 24-h trends were observed in Se concentrations compared to August, which showed daily maximums up to 59% greater than the daily minimum. Both filtered and unfiltered As concentrations also varied on a diel cycle, with increased concentrations during early morning and decreased concentrations during daytime. Filtered As concentrations increased 110% during the May 24-25, 2006 diel study. Selenium varied in phase with pH, dissolved O-2 (DO), and water temperature (T-w) whereas As varied opposite to Se, pH, DO and T-w. Changes in pH. DO and T-w showed a direct linear correlation (r = 0.74, 0.75, and 0.55, respectively) to filtered Se. Also pH, DO and T-w were inversely correlated to filtered As concentration (r = -0.88, -0.87, and -0.84, respectively). Equilibrium geochemical speciation and sorption models were used to examine the potential oxidation state changes in Se and As, and sorption and desorption reactions corresponding to the observed 24-h variations in pe and pH. In this wetland it was postulated that diel Se variation was driven by sorption and desorption due to photosynthesis-induced changes in pH and redox conditions. Diel variations of As were hypothesized to be linked to pH-driven sorption and desorption as well as co-precipitation and co-dissolution with mineral phases of Mn. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.5
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