IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i17p13225-d1232219.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Source Analysis Based on the Positive Matrix Factorization Models and Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals in Agricultural Soil

Author

Listed:
  • Dejun Yang

    (School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China
    Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Yong Yang

    (School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Yipei Hua

    (School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

Abstract

Soil heavy metal pollution is a severe and growing problem, and it is crucial to assess the level of soil heavy metal contamination and determine the origins of pollutants. However, there is limited research on soil heavy metal source apportionment and its carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic hazards. Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF) is a powerful technique for source apportionment of pollutants in environmental matrices such as atmospheric particulate matter and soil, as it can handle missing and imprecise data to ensure data reliability, among other benefits. In order to explore the distribution characteristics and main sources of heavy metals in agricultural land, the contents of Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, and Ni were collected and determined. The positive matrix factorization (PMF) model was used to analyze the source of heavy metals in the soil in the study area, and the human health risk evaluation was carried out. The results showed that (1) the coefficient of variation of Cd in the four areas was much higher than that of the other four heavy metals, which showed strong variability; (2) the content and distribution of heavy metals in different regions were different under the influence of different environments; (3) the PMF model analysis showed that the heavy metal pollution sources in the four areas were divided into two types: the soil parent material, which had industrial pollution, traffic pollution, and agricultural pollution; and the contribution rate of each pollution source; (4) the non-carcinogenic risks of heavy metals in children at all points in the study area were greater than those of adults, and the carcinogenic risks were the opposite of the carcinogenic risk in the study area. And the most serious carcinogenic risk in the study area was the harm caused by oral ingestion of heavy metal Cr into the adults’ bodies.

Suggested Citation

  • Dejun Yang & Yong Yang & Yipei Hua, 2023. "Source Analysis Based on the Positive Matrix Factorization Models and Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals in Agricultural Soil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-17, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:17:p:13225-:d:1232219
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/13225/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/13225/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huixuan Li & Yingru Li & Ming-Kuo Lee & Zhongwei Liu & Changhong Miao, 2015. "Spatiotemporal Analysis of Heavy Metal Water Pollution in Transitional China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-21, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sami Asir Al-Robai, 2023. "Ecological Risk Evaluation of Heavy Metals in Soils near a Water Dam in Baljurashi, KSA, and Their Accumulation in Dodonaea viscosa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-17, November.

    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. Fuyao Chen & Yongjun Yang & Jiaxin Mi & Run Liu & Huping Hou & Shaoliang Zhang, 2019. "Effects of Vegetation Pattern and Spontaneous Succession on Remediation of Potential Toxic Metal-Polluted Soil in Mine Dumps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-13, January.
    2. Zhenbo Zhang & Xiaohua Meng, 2019. "Internet Penetration and the Environmental Kuznets Curve: A Cross-National Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-12, March.
    3. Yingru Li & Huixuan Li & Zhongwei Liu & Changhong Miao, 2016. "Spatial Assessment of Cancer Incidences and the Risks of Industrial Wastewater Emission in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    4. Rongfei Zhang & Jianhua Zhao & Qiang Sheng & Yixiang Zhang & Jinyun Ye, 2022. "Pollution Evaluation and Health Risk Assessment of Trace Metals in Eleven Tissues of Mylopharyngodon piceus Collected from an Aquaculture Pond in Huzhou, near Southern Taihu Lake," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-13, September.
    5. Guangcai Yin & Hanghai Zhu & Zhiliang Chen & Chuanghong Su & Zechen He & Xinglin Chen & Jinrong Qiu & Tieyu Wang, 2021. "Spatial Distribution and Source Apportionment of Soil Heavy Metals in Pearl River Delta, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-14, August.
    6. Wenwen Gao & Yuan Zeng & Yu Liu & Bingfang Wu, 2019. "Human Activity Intensity Assessment by Remote Sensing in the Water Source Area of the Middle Route of the South-to-North Water Diversion Project in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-13, October.
    7. Huda M. Madhloom & Nadhir Al-Ansari & Jan Laue & Ali Chabuk, 2017. "Modeling Spatial Distribution of Some Contamination within the Lower Reaches of Diyala River Using IDW Interpolation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Shouhui Pan & Kaiyi Wang & Li Wang & Zhibin Wang & Yanyun Han, 2017. "Risk Assessment System Based on WebGIS for Heavy Metal Pollution in Farmland Soils in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-22, October.

    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:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:17:p:13225-:d:1232219. 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.