Acta Facultatis Ecologiae - TechnickÃ¡ univerzita vo Zvolene

More documents

Recommendations

Info

149Fig. 1 Podlipa dump-fieldCanada). Plant samples were divided into roots,branches/stems, leaves/needles and flowers/fruits.0.5 g of vegetation sample was after split digestionin HNO 3and then in Aqua Regia analysed byICP-MS for ultralow detection limits. The contaminationof live and dead parts was compared inseveral plants. Plants were analyzed in the samelaboratory as sediments. As and Sb were analysedin the laboratories of Geological Institute of theFaculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University,Bratislava. The samples were pressure-decomposedin Aqua Regia and analysed using electrotermicatomization. The water samples were analyzedin the National Water Reference Laboratory forSlovakia at the Water Research Institute in Brati-slava. Microscopical analyses of plant tissues wererealized in the laboratories of the Department ofWood Science and Technology of the TechnicalUniversity Z<strong>vo</strong>len.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONSediments and drainage watercontamination by heavy metalsTable 1 presents concentrations of Fe, Cu, Zn,Pb, Ag, Cd, Ni, Co, As and Sb in the sediments fromthe reference sites A and B and contaminated planesC – F. Soil from the reference site A contains surprisinglythe highest Zn concentrations. Sediments
150from the dump plant C contain the highest concentrationsof Fe, Pb, Ag, Ni, Co, As and Sb. SiteE shows the highest Cu and site C the highest Coconcentrations. Sediment from the wetland (planeE) contains mostly Cu (6766 ppm). Sediment fromthe plane F is mostly contaminated by Cd and Zn(with exception of the Zn concentration in referencesite A).Water sample VX from the Zelená Valley belowmine waste dumps has the lowest pH from thecollected surface water (tab. 2). This sample hasthe highest concentrations of Fe and Cd. SampleVF has pH 6.7 and the highest concentrations ofCu (810 µg/ml), Zn (30 µg/ml), Ag (2 µg/ml), Ni (8µg/ml) and Sb (0.2 µg/ml) and Co (7.0 µg/ml). Thecomparison of water from the reference plane withother water samples shows its gradual saturation byheavy metals from the dump material. Concentrationsof heavy metals culminate in the wetland whereis assumed partial precipitation of metals.Plant tissues contamination by heavymetalsThe knowledge of content of heavy metals inplants is important from the point of foot cycle contamination.The intensity of plant contamination byheavy metals is necessary to critize dependence upon plant species.Leaves are the most contaminated part ofMentha longifolia in case of all observed heavymetals at the dump-field and reference site (tabs 3and 4). As and Sb analysis shows higher contaminationof flowers where As content is 1.44 ppm andSb content is 2.07 ppm. Similarly. the highest concentrationsof heavy metals (with exception of As.Sb. Cu and Ag) were determined in leaves of Acetosellavulgaris from the valley below the dump--field besides As and Sb (tab. 3). Plant roots are themost contaminated part of Juncus articulatus fromthe wetland besides Cu and Sb (tab. 3). The highestTab. 1 Ľubietová, analyses of the dump-field sedimentsFe Cu Zn Pb Ag Cd Ni Co As SbSample % ppmA 1.38 25 39 16.1 0.1 0.1 8.5 5.1 7 10.4B 1.12 390 36 13.6 0.3 0.1 7.8 7.1 32 17.5C 2.58 541 20 24.1 1.6 0.1 31.6 53.6 294 39.2D 2.14 1977 23 7.9 0.3 0.1 17.1 36.2 34 15.6E 2.25 6766 19 17.7 0.7 0.1 25.8 34.9 153 26.4F 1.61 1388 29 16.2 0.6 0.3 16.6 15.1 85 17.7Explanations to the tab. 1–4: localization of samples is marked at fig. 1Tab. 2 Ľubietová, spectrochemical analyses of surface and drainage waterSample pHFe Cu Zn Pb Ag Cd Ni Co As SbppbVB* 6.3 221.0 14.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 2.7 0.0 0.00 0.0VB** 6.5 299.0 25.8 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.4 5.3 0.0 0.02 0.0VB*** 6.5 260.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.3 4.0 0.0 0.01 0.0VX* 5.7 342.5 34.1 4.3 0.0 1.0 0.3 5.1 2.6 0,00 0.1VX** 7.1 297.7 35.9 5.3 0.1 1.2 0.7 5.3 3.0 0.01 0.1VX*** 6.4 320.2 35.0 4.8 0.1 1.1 0.5 5.2 2.8 0.01 0.1VF* 6.5 164.2 795.3 34.6 0.0 1.6 0.5 7.7 6.2 0.01 0.1VF** 6.9 156.4 824.7 25.4 0.0 2.4 0.5 8.3 7.8 0.01 0.3VF*** 6.7 160.3 810.0 30.0 0.0 2.0 0.5 8.0 7.0 0.01 0.2Explanations:* sampled on June 2006 after rainfall** sampled on June 2007 in dry season*** average sample
Page 2 and 3:
Acta FacultatisEcologiaeJournal of
Page 4 and 5:
OBSAH / CONTENTSISOL M., MICHALÍKO
Page 6:
5ACTA FACULTATIS ECOLOGIAE, 16: Sup
Page 12:
11ACTA FACULTATIS ECOLOGIAE, 16: Su
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
19are lower in ill patients compare
Page 22:
21are considered as the most accura
Page 25 and 26:
24- multimode cavities are usually
Page 27 and 28:
26the load during its exposure to f
Page 29 and 30:
28Tradescantia paludosa 02 test and
Page 31 and 32:
30Tab. 5: Results of positive contr
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
35DISCUSSIONThe ionising radiation
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
39222Rn is produced by radioactive
Page 42 and 43:
41180160140this reason we also pick
Page 44:
435001450400350hKz0,8h [m]300250200
Page 47 and 48:
46deposit is that stripped in off-l
Page 49 and 50:
48TruenessTrueness was determined i
Page 51 and 52:
50MATERIAL AND METHODSChloroform (p
Page 53 and 54:
52absorbance [a.u.]1,000,750,500,25
Page 55 and 56:
54Tab. 1: Rrequirements determinati
Page 57 and 58:
56Methods of VOC testing were set a
Page 60 and 61:
59Tab. 6: ContinuedSamples withsurf
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
63One of the possible explanations
Page 66 and 67:
65Ai - Ai-1 [Bq.m -3 ]86420-2-4-6-8
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
69BiodegradabilityThe great variety
Page 72 and 73:
71degradation starts of late days,
Page 74 and 75:
73Fig. 4 Treated (after 28 days of
Page 76:
75parameters of the cutting process
Page 80 and 81:
79Fraction: D (residual rest) prese
Page 82:
81was not confirmed. Maximum of mer
Page 85 and 86:
84Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of atomi
Page 87 and 88:
86Alpha spectrometryAlpha spectrome
Page 89 and 90:
8880007000y = 6622xR 2 = 0.939SIMS
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
93Gemer according to the German mod
Page 96 and 97:
95Tab. 1 Results of the chemical an
Page 98 and 99:
97Continuation of Tab. 2 Results of
Page 100 and 101: 99Vlčia Dolina and from the reserv
Page 102 and 103: 101ACTA FACULTATIS ECOLOGIAE, 16: S
Page 104 and 105: 103mg.dm -3mg.dm -35,004,003,002,00
Page 106 and 107: 105year and the average value repre
Page 110 and 111: 109Sample site 1 Sample site 2 Samp
Page 112 and 113: 111As for the sampling time (Fig. 5
Page 116 and 117: 115Typha latifolia, Carex sp., Scir
Page 118 and 119: 117conditions for decomposition of
Page 122 and 123: 121from the background (derived fro
Page 124 and 125: 12311. PETROVSKÝ, E., ELWOOD, B.:
Page 128 and 129: 1272.52.0Correlation coefficient 0,
Page 132 and 133: 131RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONTable 2 gi
Page 136 and 137: 135V-1 BOREHOLEThe courses of 222 R
Page 138 and 139: 137AV-2 (40m) 2006A ( 222 Rn) [kBq/
Page 140 and 141: 139soaks into the soil, another par
Page 144 and 145: 143Fig. 2 The continuous monitoring
Page 146 and 147: 145Indoor radon activity concentrat
Page 152 and 153: 151concentrations of Fe. Cu. Cd. Ni
Page 154 and 155: 153DUMP-FIELDREFERENCE SITEppm15001
Page 156 and 157: 155Fig. 5 Compression of wood forma
Page 158 and 159: 157decrease in the following order:
Page 162 and 163: 161SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OFFACTORS THAT
Page 166 and 167: 165The methods developed to incorpo
Page 168 and 169: 167The effects of wind on ozone con
Page 170 and 171: 169Fig. 6 Mean total and stomatal f
Page 172 and 173: 171transport modelling in North Ame
Page 175: Acta Facultatis Ecologiae, Volume 1
show all

Acta Facultatis Ecologiae - TechnickÃ¡ univerzita vo Zvolene

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?