IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v11y2021i12p1234-d697109.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Potentially Toxic Elements in Oasis Agricultural Soils Caused by High-Intensity Exploitation in the Piedmont Zone of the Tianshan Mountains, China

Author

Listed:
  • Wen Liu

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    Research Center for Ecology and Environment of Central Asia, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Long Ma

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    Research Center for Ecology and Environment of Central Asia, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Jilili Abuduwaili

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    Research Center for Ecology and Environment of Central Asia, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

Abstract

Considering the pollution of potentially toxic elements (PTEs) in the soils of China, the present study analyzed the current state and influencing factors of PTEs in oasis soils using the model of absolute principal component score–multiple linear regression in the piedmont zone of the Tianshan Mountains. The possible non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic risks of PTEs at current concentrations were also explored using a human-health risk-assessment model. The results suggested that the extent to which potentially toxic elements in the soils of different geographical units in the study area is affected by human activities varies considerably. The PTEs Cd and As in the soils of the Yili River Watershed were the most strongly influenced by human activities, reaching levels of 40% and 59%, respectively. However, in the Bortala River Watershed, Cu, Cd, and As were the most strongly influenced by human activities, reaching levels of 33%, 64%, and 76%, respectively. Geographical units with a high degree of economic development (e.g., the Yili River Watershed) had, in contrast, low levels of PTE pollution caused by human activities, which may be related to the regional economic development structure. The human health risk assessment showed that the non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic risks of PTEs are currently below the threshold. However, increasing the arsenic content to 1.78 times the current level in the Bortala River Watershed would lead to carcinogenic risk. For the Yili River Watershed, a 3.33-fold increase in the arsenic content above its current level would lead to a carcinogenic risk. This risk should be addressed, and targeted environmental-protection measures should be formulated. The present research results will provide important decision support for regional environmental protection.

Suggested Citation

  • Wen Liu & Long Ma & Jilili Abuduwaili, 2021. "Potentially Toxic Elements in Oasis Agricultural Soils Caused by High-Intensity Exploitation in the Piedmont Zone of the Tianshan Mountains, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:12:p:1234-:d:697109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/12/1234/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/12/1234/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pang, Jihong & Liu, Xiaojing & Huang, Qinghua, 2020. "A new quality evaluation system of soil and water conservation for sustainable agricultural development," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    2. Wei, Hejie & Liu, Huiming & Xu, Zihan & Ren, Jiahui & Lu, Nachuan & Fan, Weiguo & Zhang, Peng & Dong, Xiaobin, 2018. "Linking ecosystem services supply, social demand and human well-being in a typical mountain–oasis–desert area, Xinjiang, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 44-57.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wei-Ling Hsu & Zhicheng Zhuang & Cheng Li & Jie Zhao, 2025. "Optimization of Land Use Patterns in a Typical Coal Resource-Based City Based on the Ecosystem Service Relationships of ‘Food–Carbon–Recreation’," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Bojie Wang & Haiping Tang & Qin Zhang & Fengqi Cui, 2020. "Exploring Connections among Ecosystem Services Supply, Demand and Human Well-Being in a Mountain-Basin System, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Yaqian Li & Yongqiang Liu & Yan Qin & Kun Zhang & Reifat Enwer & Weiping Wang & Shuai Yuan, 2024. "Evolution and Predictive Analysis of Spatiotemporal Patterns of Habitat Quality in the Turpan–Hami Basin," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Ruiming Xiao & Yuxuan Qiao & Xiaobin Dong & Huize Ren & Xuechao Wang & Peng Zhang & Qiaoru Ye & Xiaomin Xiao, 2024. "Ecosystem Health Assessment of the Manas River Basin: Application of the CC-PSR Model Improved by Coupling Coordination Degree," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-25, August.
    5. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    6. Tian Wang & Xiaodong Chen & Xin Zheng & Yayan Lu & Fang Han & Zhaoping Yang, 2022. "Identification of Priority Conservation Areas for Natural Heritage Sites Integrating Landscape Ecological Risks and Ecosystem Services: A Case Study in the Bogda, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-17, February.
    7. Ruifan Xu & Yun Ding & Deiquan Hao & Wenxin Liu, 2023. "The evolution trend, regional differences, and influencing factors of sustainable development efficiency in rural China under the constraint of water and energy," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 47(4), pages 699-723, November.
    8. Qinqin Shi & Hai Chen & Di Liu & Tianwei Geng & Hang Zhang, 2022. "Identifying the Spatial Imbalance in the Supply and Demand of Cultural Ecosystem Services," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-20, May.
    9. Cong Liu & Wenlai Jiang & Jianmei Wei & Hui Lu & Yang Liu & Qing Li, 2025. "A Coupling Coordination Assessment of the Land–Water–Food Nexus in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-24, January.
    10. Huang, Jiasi & Xia, Zheyi & Liu, Liming, 2024. "Impacts of landscape configurations on ecosystem services and their trade-offs across different landscape compositions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Jianxiu Yang & Xing Ma & Xueyan Zhao & Wenqing Li, 2022. "Spatiotemporal of the Coupling Relationship between Ecosystem Services and Human Well-Being in Guanzhong Plain Urban Agglomeration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-19, October.
    12. Zhiguo Wang & Junbin Wang & Guoping Zhang & Zhixiong Wang, 2021. "Evaluation of Agricultural Extension Service for Sustainable Agricultural Development Using a Hybrid Entropy and TOPSIS Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, January.
    13. Virginia López Nevárez, 2023. "Possibilities for Sustainable Development in Corn Intensification Scenarios," Technium, Technium Science, vol. 10(1), pages 106-130.
    14. Zhicun Xu & Naiming Xie & Lifeng Wu, 2024. "Evaluation on sustainable development of 11 regions in Hebei province," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(6), pages 14189-14203, June.
    15. Yi Shang & Dongyan Wang & Hong Li, 2024. "Identification of Priority Areas for Ecological Restoration Based on Ecosystem Service Bundles and Human Activity Footprint in Western Jilin, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-19, November.
    16. Danmeng Wang & Shilin Li & Shynggys Toktarbek & Nueryia Jiakula & Ping Ma & Yongzhong Feng, 2022. "Research on the Coordination between Agricultural Production and Environmental Protection in Kazakhstan Based on the Rationality of the Objective Weighting Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-14, March.
    17. Jiake Shen & Yuncai Wang & Xiaolu Guo, 2021. "Identifying and Setting Linear Water Space Priorities in Co-Urbanized Area Based on Multiple Levels and Multiple Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-27, July.
    18. Linru Li & Yu Bai & Xuefeng Yuan & Feiyan Li, 2025. "Assessing the Supply–Demand Matching and Spatial Flow of Urban Cultural Ecosystem Services: Based on Geospatial Data and User Interaction Data," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-25, April.
    19. Huang, Qingxu & Yin, Dan & He, Chunyang & Yan, Jubo & Liu, Ziwen & Meng, Shiting & Ren, Qiang & Zhao, Rui & Inostroza, Luis, 2020. "Linking ecosystem services and subjective well-being in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: Insights from a multilevel linear model," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    20. Lyu, Rongfang & Zhao, Wenpeng & Pang, Jili & Tian, Xiaolei & Zhang, Jianming & Wang, Naiang, 2022. "Towards a sustainable nature reserve management: Using Bayesian network to quantify the threat of disturbance to ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:12:p:1234-:d:697109. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.