Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering

ISSN 2095-2201

ISSN 2095-221X(Online)

CN 10-1013/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-973

2018 Impact Factor: 3.883

Front. Environ. Sci. Eng.    2023, Vol. 17 Issue (6) : 70    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-023-1670-8
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Distribution, enrichment mechanism and risk assessment for fluoride in groundwater: a case study of Mihe-Weihe River Basin, China
Xingyue Qu1, Peihe Zhai1(), Longqing Shi1, Xingwei Qu2, Ahmer Bilal1, Jin Han3, Xiaoge Yu4
1. College of Earth Science and Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
2. College of Safety and Environmental Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
3. College of Computer Science and Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
4. Department of Resource and Civil Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Tai’an 271019, China
 Download: PDF(8709 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

● High fluorine is mainly HCO3·Cl-Na and HCO3-Na type.

● F decreases with the increase of depth to water table.

● High fluoride is mainly affected by fluorine-containing minerals and weak alkaline.

● Fluorine pollution is mainly in the north near Laizhou Bay (wet season > dry season).

● Groundwater samples have a high F health risk (children > adults).

Due to the unclear distribution characteristics and causes of fluoride in groundwater of Mihe-Weihe River Basin (China), there is a higher risk for the future development and utilization of groundwater. Therefore, based on the systematic sampling and analysis, the distribution features and enrichment mechanism for fluoride in groundwater were studied by the graphic method, hydrogeochemical modeling, the proportionality factor between conventional ions and factor analysis. The results show that the fluorine content in groundwater is generally on the high side, with a large area of medium-fluorine water (0.5–1.0 mg/L), and high-fluorine water is chiefly in the interfluvial lowlands and alluvial-marine plain, which mainly contains HCO3·Cl-Na- and HCO3-Na-type water. The vertical zonation characteristics of the fluorine content decrease with increasing depth to the water table. The high flouride groundwater during the wet season is chiefly controlled by the weathering and dissolution of fluorine-containing minerals, as well as the influence of rock weathering, evaporation and concentration. The weak alkaline environment that is rich in sodium and poor in calcium during the dry season is the main reason for the enrichment of fluorine. Finally, an integrated assessment model is established using rough set theory and an improved matter element extension model, and the level of groundwater pollution caused by fluoride in the Mihe-Weihe River Basin during the wet and dry seasons in the Shandong Peninsula is defined to show the necessity for local management measures to reduce the potential risks caused by groundwater quality.

Keywords Groundwater in the Mihe-Weihe River Basin      Distribution characteristics of fluorine      Factors influencing fluoride      Enrichment mechanism of fluorine      Hydrogeochemical modeling      Pollution and risk assessment     
Corresponding Author(s): Peihe Zhai   
Issue Date: 03 January 2023
 Cite this article:   
Xingyue Qu,Peihe Zhai,Longqing Shi, et al. Distribution, enrichment mechanism and risk assessment for fluoride in groundwater: a case study of Mihe-Weihe River Basin, China[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2023, 17(6): 70.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-023-1670-8
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y2023/V17/I6/70
Fig.1  Geologic section from Qingshan to Laizhou Bay in Mihe-Weihe River Basin.
SeasonStatisticsParameters
pHTDS (mg/L)K+ (mg/L)Na+ (mg/L)Ca2+ (mg/L)Mg2+ (mg/L)Cl? (mg/L )SO42? ( mg/L )HCO3? (mg/L )NO3? (mg/L )F? (mg/L )
Wet seasonMin7.08345.000.4214.417.766.3518.558.39164.500.223.70
Max8.282285.0020.04731.30386.40164.70900.60646.70677.508.49816.60
Mean7.521083.603.47130.04167.4847.00183.79151.75364.500.79214.70
Std.0.27401.234.38119.0782.9426.56123.9095.88108.401.00169.23
Dry seasonMin6.80355.880.4913.076.880.1223.098.73125.100.195.37
Max11.115688.7284.011579.41395.33180.892529.23699.81825.996.48739.17
Mean7.501089.854.83129.13169.8548.07190.75139.55373.500.57200.49
Std.0.51637.6910.43193.2986.2430.96277.03102.36125.700.78171.34
Tab.1  Statistics of hydrochemical indexes for groundwater samples from wet season and dry season (n1=87 and n2=92)
SeasonStatisticsClassifications of fluorine content in groundwater (mg/L)Total
Low fluorine water(F?<0.50)Medium fluorine water(0.50≤F?≤1.00)High fluorine water(F?>1.00)
Wet seasonNumbers35.0038.0014.0087.00
Min/Max0.22/0.490.50/0.941.09/8.490.22/8.49
Mean0.380.622.290.79
Std.0.070.111.901.00
Dry seasonNumbers65.0019.008.0092.00
Min/Max0.19/0.490.50/0.921.09/6.480.19/6.48
Mean0.320.672.350.57
Std.0.070.141.870.78
Tab.2  Statistics of fluoride concentration in wet season and dry season
Fig.2  (a) Piper diagram expressing hydrochemical characteristics in wet season. (b) Piper diagram expressing hydrochemical characteristics in dry season.
Fig.3  (a) Spatial distribution characteristics of fluoride in wet season. (b) Vertical distribution characteristics of fluorine content in wet season. (c) Spatial distribution characteristics of fluoride in dry season. (d) Vertical distribution characteristics of fluorine content in dry season.
Fig.4  (a) Comparison of fluorine content in groundwater during wet season and dry season. (b) Relationship between fluoride concentration and depth to water table. (c) Relationship between fluorine content in groundwater and ground height. (d) Relationship between fluoride concentration and pH.
Fig.5  Relationship between fluoride concentration and TDS.
Fig.6  (a) Relationship between fluoride concentration and Ca2+. (b) Relationship between fluoride concentration and Mg2+. (c) Relationship between fluoride concentration and Cl?. (d) Relationship between fluoride concentration and SO42?. (e) Relationship between fluoride concentration and Na+. (f) Relationship between fluoride concentration and HCO3?.
Fig.7  (a) Relationship between Na+/(Na++Ca2+) and TDS in wet season. (b) Relationship between Na+/(Na++Ca2+) and TDS in dry season. (c) Relationship between fluoride concentration and SIFluorite. (d) Relationship between SICalcite and SIFluorite. (e) Relationship between Ca2+ (%) and fluoride concentration. (f) Relationship between log[Ca2+] activity and log[F?] activity.
IndicesWet season Principal componentsDry season Principal components
1212
Ca2+ (mg/L)?0.859?0.028?0.2630.808
pH0.8340.165?0.158?0.633
F? (mg/L)0.6790.4710.685?0.490
HCO3? (mg/L)0.1280.8030.8400.031
Mg2+ (mg/L)?0.4930.6860.3910.686
Na+ (mg/L)0.5200.6760.7760.095
Ground height (m)?0.276?0.438?0.549?0.166
Eigenvalue3.0151.4982.3261.802
Variance contribution (%)35.73228.73933.22025.743
Accumulating contribution rate (%)35.73264.47133.22058.963
Tab.3  Principal components for fluorine richness in groundwater during wet season and dry season in Mihe-Weihe River Basin.
Fig.8  (a) Pattern graph of fluorine richness in wet season. (b) Pattern graph of fluorine richness in dry season.
Fig.9  Contamination assessment in wet season. (a) CF; (b) EF; (c) Igeo.
Fig.10  Contamination assessment in dry season. (a) CF; (b) EF; (c) Igeo.
IndexesPollution degree
Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 6
wet seasondry seasonwet seasondry seasonwet seasondry seasonwet seasondry seasonwet seasondry seasonwet seasondry season
CF0.065?0.046?0.0650.1080.1700.4170.5240.880
EF0.9990.0130.9980.0120.9950.0110.9790.0020.959?0.0020.0000.009
Igeo0.019?0.312?0.0191.1000.3811.5740.7812.048
Tab.4  Extension distance for SY01 in wet season and dry season
IndexesSeasonσXQWi
CFWet season0.9080.325
Dry season0.9350.335
EFWet season0.9770.350
Dry season0.9670.346
IgeoWet season0.9080.325
Dry season0.8910.319
Tab.5  Standardized weights of indexes
Fig.11  Risk assessment in wet season. (a) E; (b) HI for adults; (c) HI for children.
Fig.12  (a) Pollution degree in wet season. (b) Pollution degree in dry season.
Fig.13  Risk assessment in dry season. (a) E; (b) HI for adults; (c) HI for children.
1 S K Andezhath , A K Susheela , G Ghosh . (1999). Fluorosis management in India: the impact due to networking between health and rural drinking water supply agencies. IAHS-AISH Publication, 260: 159–165
2 V Antoniadis , E E Golia , Y T Liu , S L Wang , S M Shaheen , J Rinklebe . (2019). Soil and maize contamination by trace elements and associated health risk assessment in the industrial area of Volos, Greece. Environment International, 124: 79–88
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.12.053
3 S Ayoob , A K Gupta . (2006). Fluoride in drinking water: a review on the status and stress effects. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 36(6): 433–487
https://doi.org/10.1080/10643380600678112
4 Y Q Cao , Y J Bian . (2021). Improving the ecological environmental performance to achieve carbon neutrality: The application of DPSIR-improved matter-element extension cloud model. Journal of Environmental Management, 293: 112887
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112887
5 M Chakravarty , A D Patgiri . (2009). Metal pollution assessment in sediments of the Dikrong River, NE India. Journal of Human Ecology (Delhi, India), 27(1): 63–67
https://doi.org/10.1080/09709274.2009.11906193
6 H Y ChenY G TengS J LuY Y WangJ S (2015) Wang. Contamination features and health risk of soil heavy metals in China. Science of the Total Environment, 512-513: 143-153 doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.01.025
7 T Chernet , Y Travi , V Valles . (2001). Mechanism of degradation of the quality of natural water in the lakes region of the Ethiopian rift valley. Water Research, 35(12): 2819–2832
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(01)00002-1
8 P Dang , X Gu , C Y Lin , M Xin , H Zhang , W Ouyang , X T Liu , M C He , B D Wang . (2021). Distribution, sources, and ecological risks of potentially toxic elements in the Laizhou Bay, Bohai Sea: under the long-term impact of the yellow river input. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 413(3): 125429
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125429
9 R Dehbandi , F Moore , B Keshavarzi . (2018). Geochemical sources, hydrogeochemical behavior, and health risk assessment of fluoride in an endemic fluorosis area, central Iran. Chemosphere, 193: 763–776
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.11.021
10 E De Miguel , I Iribarren , E Chacon , A Ordonez , S Charlesworth . (2007). Risk-based evaluation of the exposure of children to trace elements in playgrounds in Madrid (Spain). Chemosphere, 66(3): 505–513
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.05.065
11 J Y Du , D S Wu , H Y Xiao , P Li . (2011). Adsorption of fluoride on clay minerals and their mechanisms using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 5(2): 212–226
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-010-0255-5
12 M EgliA MirabellaP (2001) Fitze. Clay mineral transformations in soils affected by fluorine and depletion of organic matter within a time span of 24 years. Geoderma, 103 (s3–4): 3–4
13 M Gholizadeh , R Patimar . (2018). Ecological risk assessment of heavy metals in surface sediments from the Gorgan Bay, Caspian Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 137: 662–667
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.11.009
14 L Hakanson . (1980). An ecological risk index for aquatic pollution control, a sedimentological approach. Water Research, 14(8): 975–1001
https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(80)90143-8
15 G Jacks , P Bhattacharya , V Chaudhary , K P Singh . (2005). Controls on the genesis of some high-fluoride groundwaters in India. Applied Geochemistry, 20(2): 221–228
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2004.07.002
16 T Jayarathne , C E Stockwell , R J Yokelson , S Nakao , E A Stone . (2014). Emissions of fine particle fluoride from biomass burning. Environmental Science & Technology, 48(21): 12636–12644
https://doi.org/10.1021/es502933j
17 H F Jia , S D Liang , Y S Zhang . (2015). Assessing the impact on groundwater safety of inter-basin water transfer using a coupled modeling approach. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 9(1): 84–95
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-014-0741-2
18 P Kharb , A K Susheela . (1994). Fluoride ingestion in excess and its effect on organic and certain inorganic constituents of soft tissues. Medical Science Research, 22: 43–44
19 X Q Li , X W Hou , Z C Zhou , L X Liu . (2011). Geochemical provenance and spatial distribution of fluoride in groundwater of Taiyuan basin, China. Environmental Earth Sciences, 62(8): 1635–1642
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0648-6
20 T Liaghati , M Preda , M Cox . (2004). Heavy metal distribution and controlling factors within coastal plain sediments, Bells Creek catchment, southeast Queensland, Australia. Environment International, 29(7): 935–948
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-4120(03)00060-6
21 L Q (2009) Lin. Application of toxicological safety evaluation data to calculate Toxicity Coefficient of heavy metals. Beijing: Energy Resources and Environment Professional Council of All-China Environment Federation, 60–63 (in Chinese)
22 X L LvJ T LiuL ZhuY X ZhangH J (2020) Li. Evolution feature and gensis of fluoride groundwater in shallow aquifer from Qin Wangchuan basin. Ganhanqu Ziyuan Yu Huanjing, 34(03): 188-195 (in Chinese)
23 Z M Ma , J S Mi , Y T Lin , J J Li . (2022). Boundary region-based variable precision covering rough set models. Information Sciences, 608: 1524–1540
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2022.07.048
24 D B Mooreb , D Levya . (2004). The shallow ground water chemistry of arsenic, fluorine, and major elements: Eastern Owens Lake, California. Applied Geochemistry, 14(1): 53–65
25 G Muller . (1969). Index of geoaccumulation in sediments of the Rhine River. GeoJournal, 2: 108–118
26 F H Nielsen . (2009). Micronutrients in parenteral nutrition: boron, silicon, and fluoride. Gastroenterology, 137(5): S55–S60
https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2009.07.072
27 K S Pillai , V A Stanley . (2002). Implications of fluoride-an endless uncertainty. Journal of Environmental Biology, 23: 81–87
28 J L Qiao , Z M Cui , Y K Sun , Q H Hu , X H Guan . (2014). Simultaneous removal of arsenate and fluoride from water by Al-Fe (hydr)oxides. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 8(2): 169–179
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-013-0533-0
29 D V ReddyP NagabhushanamB S SukhijaA G S ReddyP L (2010) Smedley. Fluoride dynamics in the granitic aquifer of the Wailapally watershed, Nalgonda District, India. Chemical Geology, 269(3-4): 278-289 doi:10.1016/j.chemgeo.2009.10.003
30 J Rinklebe , V Antoniadis , S M Shaheen , O Rosche , M Altermann . (2019). Health risk assessment of potentially toxic elements in soils along the Central Elbe River, Germany. Environment International, 126: 76–88
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.02.011
31 A Sawassi , G Ottomano Palmisano , B Crookston , R Khadra . (2022). The dominance-based rough set approach for analysing patterns of flexibility allocation and design-cost criteria in large-scale irrigation systems. Agricultural Water Management, 272: 107842
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107842
32 (1989) USEPA. Risk assessment guidance for Superfund human health evaluation manual (Part A). I. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
33 (1993) USEPA. Reference dose (RfD): description and use in health risk assessments. Background Document 1 A. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
34 (1997) USEPA. Exposure factors handbook. Volume 1: General Factors. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development
35 (2002a) USEPA. Child-specific exposure factors handbook. EPA-600-P-00-002B. Washington, DC: National Center for Environmental Assessment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
36 (2002b) USEPA. Supplemental guidance for developing soil screening levels for Superfund sites. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
37 Y L Wang , F Li , J L Yang , M H Zhou , F H Song , D Y Zhang , L Xue , J R Zhu . (2020). Demand response evaluation of RIES based on improved matter-element extension model. Energy, 212: 118121
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118121
38 Health Organization (1993) World. Guidelines for drinking water quality, vol. I. Recommendations, 2nd edition. Geneva: WHO
39 B Wu , D Y Zhao , H Y Jia , Y Zhang , X X Zhang , S P Cheng . (2009). Preliminary risk assessment of trace metal pollution in surface water from Yangtze River in Nanjing Section, China. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 82(4): 405–409
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00128-008-9497-3
40 W (2015) Xue. Statistical Analysis and the Applications of SPSS. Beijing: China Renmin University Press (in Chinese)
41 Y J Yi , Z F Yang , S H Zhang . (2011). Ecological risk assessment of heavy metals in sediment and human health risk assessment of heavy metals in fishes in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River basin. Environmental Pollution, 159(10): 2575–2585
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2011.06.011
42 Z Y Yin , Q Lin , S H Xu . (2021). Using hydrochemical signatures to characterize the long-period evolution of groundwater information in the Dagu River Basin, China. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 15(5): 105
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-021-1393-7
43 L Yu , J J Zhang , C F Du , H B Yang , B C Ye . (2018). Distribution and pollution evaluation of fluoride in a soil-water-plant system in Shihezi, Xinjiang, China. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 24(2): 445–455
https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2017.1385386
44 Y Zhang , Z Peng , Z M Dong , M J Wang , C Jiang . (2022). Twenty years of achievements in China’s implementation of the Stockholm Convention. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 16(12): 152
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-022-1587-7
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed