Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1
;
e
x
c
e
p
t
F
e
i
n
%
)
o
f
t
o
t
a
l
t
r
a
c
e
m
e
t
a
l
s
i
n
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
s
,
o
f
f
s
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
e
r
n
T
a
i
w
a
n
,
c
o
m
p
a
r
e
d
w
i
t
h
r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d
v
a
l
u
e
s
o
f
t
r
a
c
e
m
e
t
a
l
s
f
r
o
m
o
t
h
e
r
a
r
e
a
s
o
f
T
a
i
w
a
n
,
t
h
e
U
C
C
,
U
C
-
Y
C
,
A
C
S
T
,
a
n
d
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
s
h
a
l
e
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
C
d
C
r
C
u
F
e
M
n
N
i
P
b
Z
n
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
O
f
f
s
h
o
r
e
s
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
s
(
1
0
5
5
3
7
m
)
0
.
1
5
0
.
2
7
7
8
1
5
8
3
1
4
5
3
.
3
6
.
0
3
5
6
2
,
7
7
3
3
6
4
6
4
1
6
7
9
1
2
1
9
T
h
i
s
s
t
u
d
y
M
e
a
n
0
.
2
1
9
7
3
8
4
.
0
5
9
4
4
4
0
5
0
1
1
4
S
D
(
N
=
1
2
)
0
.
0
3
2
3
5
0
.
7
5
8
1
5
3
8
3
4
C
o
a
s
t
a
l
s
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
s
(
<
1
0
0
m
)
0
.
2
2
1
.
2
0
5
6
9
6
1
4
5
7
2
.
9
8
4
.
2
6
3
5
7
3
9
0
2
6
4
0
2
1
5
3
8
5
2
4
4
T
h
i
s
s
t
u
d
y
M
e
a
n
0
.
5
6
7
3
3
2
3
.
5
7
3
6
9
3
5
4
4
1
5
8
S
D
(
N
=
8
)
0
.
3
6
1
3
1
4
0
.
4
7
1
1
4
1
0
4
7
B
e
d
s
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
,
R
i
v
e
r
K
a
o
p
i
n
g
0
.
2
3
5
8
1
4
3
.
3
2
3
2
0
3
8
4
0
9
4
T
h
i
s
s
t
u
d
y
S
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
s
,
S
W
T
a
i
w
a
n
L
e
e
e
t
a
l
.
(
1
9
9
8
)
1
.
T
a
i
n
a
n
c
o
a
s
t
0
.
0
3
0
.
1
2
1
3
3
5
6
2
3
1
.
4
2
.
6
1
6
5
7
1
1
2
8
4
1
9
2
2
.
K
a
o
h
s
i
u
n
g
c
o
a
s
t
0
.
0
3
0
.
4
1
1
6
4
8
1
1
7
0
1
.
9
2
.
8
3
4
9
5
1
5
5
0
7
5
2
6
8
3
.
S
o
u
t
h
e
r
n
B
a
y
(
m
e
a
n
)
0
.
0
5
5
2
0
2
.
6
0
.
4
8
9
4
1
1
S
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
s
,
S
W
T
a
i
w
a
n
0
.
0
2
0
.
1
3
3
5
1
8
9
2
5
6
4
1
0
3
2
2
9
1
2
9
H
u
n
g
a
n
d
H
s
u
(
2
0
0
4
)
S
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
s
,
0
.
0
4
0
.
4
2
1
2
.
5
9
5
1
.
3
2
5
1
.
6
4
3
.
9
9
1
7
6
4
3
9
4
4
3
4
2
5
4
5
1
2
8
L
e
e
e
t
a
l
.
(
2
0
0
0
)
K
a
o
h
s
i
u
n
g
c
o
a
s
t
E
r
h
j
i
n
C
h
i
c
o
a
s
t
1
6
5
6
6
7
9
7
H
u
n
g
e
t
a
l
.
(
1
9
9
3
)
S
W
T
a
i
w
a
n
0
.
1
0
0
.
2
0
1
5
2
5
1
5
2
5
9
5
1
2
0
L
i
n
a
n
d
H
u
n
g
(
1
9
9
2
)
M
i
d
d
l
e
w
e
s
t
T
a
i
w
a
n
0
.
1
7
0
.
4
4
3
3
1
0
4
0
3
2
9
0
H
u
n
g
e
t
a
l
.
(
1
9
9
4
)
K
a
o
h
s
i
u
n
g
H
a
r
b
o
r
(
K
H
)
0
.
0
8
2
7
4
6
8
C
h
e
n
(
1
9
7
7
)
K
H
1
.
3
6
.
6
2
4
6
0
0
1
9
5
1
0
1
7
2
5
2
1
0
0
1
,
5
9
0
E
P
A
(
1
9
9
2
)
a
K
H
0
.
8
7
2
.
6
9
2
9
3
2
2
9
7
2
5
9
4
0
7
5
1
3
1
,
4
3
2
E
P
A
(
1
9
9
2
)
a
K
H
0
.
3
3
1
.
2
9
9
3
2
9
0
6
3
3
6
2
1
4
4
8
1
9
1
1
,
1
5
8
H
u
n
g
(
1
9
9
4
)
K
H
0
.
1
0
4
.
6
4
4
8
5
0
5
3
4
1
4
0
C
h
e
n
a
n
d
W
u
(
1
9
9
5
)
N
o
n
-
p
o
l
l
u
t
e
d
A
r
e
a
4
0
1
2
6
1
C
h
e
n
(
1
9
9
7
)
O
f
f
C
h
i
-
J
i
n
I
s
l
a
n
d
,
T
a
i
w
a
n
0
.
1
6
4
0
4
4
C
h
e
n
(
1
9
9
7
)
L
o
w
e
r
K
a
o
h
s
i
u
n
g
R
i
v
e
r
0
.
1
3
9
1
9
4
3
6
0
C
h
e
n
(
1
9
7
7
)
K
a
o
h
s
i
u
n
g
R
i
v
e
r
0
.
4
2
1
.
9
1
6
9
9
9
8
5
0
2
0
3
C
h
e
n
a
n
d
W
u
(
1
9
9
5
)
T
a
n
s
h
u
i
R
i
v
e
r
0
.
0
2
4
0
.
0
6
4
3
1
7
5
2
.
9
4
3
5
0
5
0
0
1
9
5
8
7
2
2
7
0
S
u
e
t
a
l
.
(
1
9
8
5
)
K
e
e
l
u
n
g
R
i
v
e
r
0
.
0
5
0
.
7
3
3
.
5
1
2
0
1
.
7
5
.
6
1
7
0
7
6
0
9
.
3
2
0
0
4
1
3
9
0
H
u
a
n
g
a
n
d
L
i
n
(
2
0
0
3
)
C
o
n
t
i
n
e
n
t
a
l
s
h
e
l
f
s
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
s
,
0
.
0
3
0
.
6
5
2
.
6
4
6
0
.
0
3
5
.
6
2
6
0
2
,
6
7
0
5
0
1
6
1
3
7
L
i
n
e
t
a
l
.
(
2
0
0
2
)
E
a
s
t
C
h
i
n
a
S
e
a
U
C
C
0
.
1
0
3
5
2
5
5
.
0
6
0
0
2
0
2
0
7
1
T
a
y
l
o
r
a
n
d
M
c
L
e
n
n
a
n
(
1
9
8
5
)
U
C
-
Y
C
0
.
0
7
8
6
6
3
5
3
.
7
0
7
7
4
3
7
1
7
7
0
G
a
o
e
t
a
l
.
(
1
9
9
8
)
A
C
S
T
N
D
9
3
2
3
3
.
1
4
6
5
8
2
2
2
0
7
9
L
i
n
e
t
a
l
.
(
2
0
0
2
)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
S
h
a
l
e
0
.
3
0
9
0
4
5
4
.
7
2
8
5
0
5
0
2
0
9
5
T
u
r
e
k
i
a
n
a
n
d
W
e
d
e
p
o
h
l
(
1
9
6
1
)
F
r
e
s
h
s
l
a
g
0
.
0
2
4
4
9
3
2
0
7
.
1
1
1
,
0
0
0
1
4
.
7
6
.
5
8
.
8
C
h
e
n
a
n
d
H
u
n
g
s
p
r
e
u
g
s
(
1
9
9
6
)
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
s
l
a
g
0
.
1
4
6
4
2
1
2
1
1
.
5
1
4
,
3
4
7
1
3
5
1
5
C
h
e
n
a
n
d
H
u
n
g
s
p
r
e
u
g
s
(
1
9
9
6
)
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
A
s
a
n
d
V
w
e
r
e
n
o
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
t
a
b
l
e
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
b
o
t
h
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
s
t
u
d
i
e
d
r
a
r
e
l
y
i
n
t
h
i
s
r
e
g
i
o
n
a
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
o
f
s
a
m
p
l
e
s
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d
d
u
r
i
n
g
1
9
8
6
/
1
9
8
7
a
n
d
1
9
9
0
Environ Geol
1 3
correlations with almost all the elements studied here, ex-
cept Cd (r = 0.45; Table 3), suggesting weak granular
afnity of elements.
Normalization and enrichment factors
Normalization is a technique used to separate the metals of
natural variability from the metal fraction that is associated
with sediments due to modern activities. Normalization of
estuarine and coastal sediment trace elements data has been
achieved, in specic, by using Al (Windom et al. 1989), Fe
(Morse et al. 1993), Li (Loring 1991), Yb (Szefer et al.
1999; Szefer 2002), OC (Daskalakis and OConnor 1995),
and grain size (Palanques and Diaz 1994). Among these
proxies, Al is a conservative element and has been widely
used objectively to compensate for variations in both grain
size and composition. Besides, anthropogenic input of Al is
a very rare phenomenon. The characteristic advantages of
Al normalization over other proxies have been mentioned
elsewhere (Loring and Rantala 1992; Rubio et al. 2000;
Selvaraj et al. 2004). Normalization can also be applied to
determine enrichment factors (EFs) which provide a tool to
evaluate sediment quality. EFs close to unity point to
crustal origin and >10 are considered as non-crustal sour-
ces (Nolting et al. 1999). Since our major element/Al ratio
(see major element geochemistry section) indicates the
upper crust of Yangtze Craton (Gao et al. 1998) and
average composition of sedimentary rocks of Taiwan
(Selvaraj and Chen 2006) as the sources for offshore and
coastal sediments, respectively, we have chosen these two
reference materials to calculate EFs employing the equa-
tion: EF = (Metal/Al)
Sediment
/(Metal/Al)
UC-YC/ACST
.
The calculated EFs for the elements As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Mn,
Ni, Pb, V, and Zn in the studied sediments are presented in
Table 6. Enrichment factors calculated with respect to UC-
YC show higher mean values for Pb (2.65) and Cd (2.46),
well-established metals of anthropogenic origin, in off-
shore sediments. Metals such as Zn, Cr, As, and Mn are
also have EFs >1 thereby suggest their enrichments in
offshore sediments likely due to dumped iron and steel
slag. Similarly, mean EFs calculated with respect to ACST
were higher unity for Pb, Ni, Cu, Mn, V, and Zn, indicating
Table 5 Data of trace elements and physicochemcial parameters (E
h
and pH) in surface sediments off southwestern Taiwan
Sample Trace elements (lg/g)
As Cd Cr Cu Mn Ni Pb V Zn pH E
h
(mV)
Offshore sediments (water depth: 105537 m)
CS4 5.0 0.20 78 31 393 38 41 100 92 7.88 113
CS5 1.0 0.25 81 33 356 40 47 114 99 7.31 155
CS6 6.2 0.20 105 40 573 46 53 141 118 7.36 146
CS8 3.2 0.22 85 44 655 42 57 92 109 7.06 149
CS10 5.7 0.18 83 41 647 40 47 109 113 7.97 200
CS12 10.5 0.15 158 31 2,773 36 61 134 219 8.61 88
CS13 3.0 0.24 82 37 439 42 50 109 106 7.43 110
CS14 5.9 0.27 81 37 711 40 51 118 105 7.52 112
CS15 7.9 0.22 111 42 1,162 36 41 106 95 7.95 102
CS17 2.9 0.19 87 36 482 40 45 102 102 7.73 120
CS19 3.5 0.21 108 36 2,475 37 44 100 91 8.12 96
CS21 7.4 0.24 105 45 660 42 67 102 119 7.52 240
Coastal sediments (water depth <100 m)
HB005 14.5 0.60 84 57 371 37 45 81 198 ND ND
HBT01 19.9 0.29 96 49 379 40 53 101 244 ND ND
K1 7.2 0.22 64 26 357 36 42 68 163 ND ND
KN2 BDL 0.88 69 26 369 35 47 84 132 ND ND
KN12 17.8 1.20 76 30 368 37 53 74 143 ND ND
KS2 23.9 0.28 72 31 365 36 46 87 162 ND ND
KS11 BDL 0.43 67 27 356 36 42 70 140 ND ND
S1 BDL 0.33 56 14 390 26 21 87 85 ND ND
Bed sediment, River Kaoping
RK 15.2 0.23 58 14 320 38 40 54 94 ND ND
ND not determined, BDL below detectable limit (<0.1 ppm)
Environ Geol
1 3
sediment contamination, despite the EFs of studied metals
vary signicantly based on the reference materials used.
Coastal sediments also exhibit higher mean EFs for Cd
(6.98), As (2.77), Pb (2.48), and Zn (2.17) with respect to
UC-YC, which further supports the above inference. It has
been previously shown (Selvaraj and Chen 2006) that
coastal sediments of Taiwan were mainly derived from the
sedimentary rocks in Taiwan, and our EF calculation over
ACST further reveals contaminated condition of coastal
sediments by metals such as Pb, Zn, Ni, and Cu (Table 6).
Bed sediment of River Kaoping reveals more or less sim-
ilar results that also shows higher enrichment factors for As
(4.76), Cd (3.34), and Pb (2.65) against UC-YC but Pb
(2.16), Ni (1.86), and Zn (1.28) against ACST, indicating
considerable input of contaminated sediment through river
into the coastal zone.
It is worth mentioning here that our calculation of EFs
with respect to the UCC (not shown in Table 6) shows
polluted nature of coastal sediments in terms of As (EFs
range 5.3317.06; mean 8.21) but contaminated condition
for offshore sediments (EFs range 1.787.15; mean 3.18).
Although very high EF values obtained especially for As
and Cd in offshore and coastal sediments with respect to
the UC-YC indicate contaminated nature of sediments
(Table 6), lower EF values of these elements with respect
to real sources, UC-YC and ACST as revealed by element/
Al ratios, when compared to UCC, suggestive of two
points: (1) the UCC cannot be used as a reference material
to calculate EFs and, in turn, to study anthropogenic impact
on sediments derived from this small island (0.024%) of
the earths surface as we normally do for sediments that
integrate weathered materials from the larger continental
Table 6 Summary statistics of enrichment factors (EFs) with respect to upper crust of Yangtze Craton (UC-YC) and average composition of
sedimentary rocks of Taiwan (ACST) in sediments, off southwestern Taiwan, compared with EFs from other areas of Taiwan
As Cd Cr Cu Mn Ni Pb V Zn
Offshore sedimentsEFs with respect to UC-YC
a
Minimum 0.25 1.82 1.02 0.83 0.42 0.87 2.17 0.90 1.22
Maximum 2.76 3.03 2.26 1.17 3.39 1.06 3.54 1.33 2.96
Mean 1.29 2.46 1.32 0.97 1.12 0.96 2.65 1.04 1.46
SD 0.68 0.37 0.35 0.13 1.02 0.05 0.45 0.12 0.48
EFs with respect to ACST
b
Minimum 0.69 1.22 0.47 1.41 1.76 1.10 1.03
Maximum 1.54 1.71 3.81 1.71 2.87 1.62 2.51
Mean 0.90 1.41 1.26 1.55 2.16 1.26 1.24
SD 0.23 0.18 1.14 0.08 0.37 0.15 0.41
Coastal sedimentsEFs with respect to UC-YC
Minimum 2.05 2.89 0.82 0.39 0.41 0.69 1.20 0.71 1.18
Maximum 6.58 15.24 1.27 1.62 0.49 0.99 3.09 0.91 2.94
Mean 2.77 6.98 1.06 0.89 0.46 0.92 2.48 0.83 2.17
SD 2.61 4.33 0.15 0.37 0.02 0.10 0.56 0.08 0.56
EFs with respect to ACST
Minimum 0.56 0.57 0.46 1.10 0.98 0.86 1.00
Maximum 0.86 2.36 0.55 1.60 2.52 1.10 2.49
Mean 0.72 1.30 0.52 1.48 2.02 1.00 1.84
SD 0.10 0.54 0.03 0.16 0.45 0.09 0.48
Bed sediment, River Kaoping
EFs with respect to UC-YC 4.76 3.34 0.99 0.45 0.47 1.16 2.65 0.64 1.51
EFs with respect to ACST 0.97 0.66 0.52 1.86 2.16 0.78 1.28
Kaoping coastal sediments 0.16 0.85 0.53 1.20 1.18
Southwestern Taiwan
c
1.65 2.92 2.38 4.94 3.50
Kaohsiung coast, Southwestern Taiwan
d
1.20 0.60 0.90 1.50 4.50 3.40
a
Gao et al. (1998)
b
Selvaraj and Chen (2006)
c
Hung and Hsu (2004)
d
Lee et al. (1998)
Environ Geol
1 3
landmass and (2) very high EF values of As and Cd might
also be related to the method of analysis applied in this
study which showed wider error limits for these elements
(see Materials and Methods Section) rather than real situ-
ation of sediments. Nonetheless, the decreasing order of
mean EFs in sediments of offshore with respect to UC-YC
(Pb > Cd > Zn > Cr > As > Mn > V > Cu > Ni) and the
coastal (Pb > Zn > Ni > Cu > V > Cr > Mn) and river
(Pb > Ni > Zn > Cr > V > Cu > Mn) environments with
respect to ACST clearly suggest that the offshore and
costal sediments are burdened with metals such as Cd, As,
Pb, and Zn with EFs >2.
Factor analysis
Geochemical factor analyses are highly suitable for deter-
mining the factors that control the trace metal distribution
than measurement of absolute metal concentrations in
specic size grains or the use of metal/normalizing element
ratios (Loring 1991; Winters and Buckley 1992). This is
because such studies can provide information about the
association of metal-inorganic or metal-organic phases.
Therefore, to decipher signicant grouping of factors and
related possible geochemical controlling processes, the
whole sediment geochemical data including mean grain
size, CaCO
3
and OC were subjected to factor analysis
using SPSS software (Version 7.5). The factors were ex-
tracted using Varimax rotation scheme with Kaiser Nor-
malization.
The results show that four factors account for 80.9% of
total variance (Table 7). Factor 1 account for 25.1% of
variance and Mn, Cr, P, S, OC, Ca, Fe, and V are loaded in
this factor. Association of OC, S, and P with redox sensi-
tive elements (Mn, Fe, and V) suggests the oxygen
depletion condition; it might be a temporary, local phe-
nomenon, and active oxidation-reduction processes near
the sediment-water interface. Further, the above associa-
tion is very characteristic feature of only two samples,
CS12 and CS19, which fall in the new and old dumping
sites (Fig. 1). The oxygen depletion is also supported by
high concentrations of S (1,267 and 940 lg g
1
) in these
samples. Metals associated with sediments behave differ-
ently in anoxic/suboxic and oxic conditions which essen-
tially depend on physicochemical characteristics (pH, E
h
,
and O
2
) of the depositional environment. For instance, oxic
depositional environment always have high E
h
when
compared to suboxic environment where the E
h
is often
low. Very high values of pH (8.61 and 8.12) and low values
of E
h
(96 and 88) measured in the sediments of new and old
dumping sites were possibly as a result of production of
hydroxide ions during the dissolution of slag according to
equation: H
2
O + FeS M Fe
2+
+ HS
+ OH
. Such disso-
lution was possible due to the relative solubility of
iron suldes like pyrrhotite (Fe
1x
S) and/or mackinawite
(FeS
1x
) present in the slag when it sinks few cm below the
sediment-water interface due to its higher density to the
zone of low concentration of oxygen as also experimentally
demonstrated by Vdovic et al. (2006). Librated Fe
2+
along
with Mn
2+
which migrated upward in the sediment column
pore-water as dissolved species and oxidized as Fe
3+
and
Mn
4+
and get precipitated either as FeMn oxyhydroxides
in the presence of free hydroxyl ions (OH
) or metal sul-
des because of HS