Comparison of selected methods used in the assessment of contamination with heavy metals in littoral sediments of lakes

Lake	Catchment	Natura 2000 Code*	Area	Height	Volume	Average depth	Max. depth	Depth factor	Shoreline depth	Shoreline development	Lake length	Average width	Elongation factor
Lake	−	−	[ha]	[m a.s.l.]	[Mm3]	[m]	[m]	−	[m]	−	[m]	[m]	−
Biala Kuta	Pregola	3140	21.3	134.3	318.2	1.4	3.2	0.44	2700	1.65	1200	177.5	6.76
Krzywa Kuta		3150	131.2	134.4	7883.1	6.0	26.5	0.23	8550	2.11	2250	583.1	3.86
Kacze		3160	1.8	134.3	5.1	0.3	0.8	0.38	490	1.04	171	103.0	1.66
Smolak		3160	7.0	135.3	125.9	1.7	5.1	0.33	1190	1.27	500	140.0	3.57
Łękuk		3150	20.7	127.4	957.4	4.6	12.5	0.37	1900	1.18	675	306.7	2.20
Wolisko	Vistula	3150	13.5	175.9	620.2	4.6	8.6	0.53	1780	1.37	588	229.6	2.56
Pilwag		3150	135.1	133.3	2025.3	1.5	3.6	0.42	7940	1.93	2320	582.3	3.98
Szwalk Wielki		3150	213.4	133.4	10505.8	4.9	11	0.45	9350	1.81	3800	561.6	6.77
Ciche		3150	15.0	141.9	330.0	2.2	4.5	0.49	2560	1.86	689	217.7	3.16
Szwalk Maly		3150	70.4	133.6	3016.8	4.3	6.7	0.64	4900	1.65	1485	474.1	3.13
Łaźno		3150	562.4	133.2	32017.9	5.7	18	0.32	17825	2.12	6200	907.1	6.83
Litygajno		3150	162.1	133.1	9763.9	6.0	16.4	0.37	10675	2.37	4700	344.9	13.63
Dubinek		3140	12.1	151.4	310.1	2.5	6.2	0.40	1660	1.35	638	189.7	3.36

* shallow lakes (3140), eutrophic lakes (3150), dystrophic lakes (3160)

Table 2

The land use in the direct catchments of the analyzed lakes

Lake	Agricultural land (%)	Wasteland (%)	Building (%)	Forest (%)
Biala Kuta	2.6	−	−	97.4
Krzywa Kuta	17.8	1.8	2.6	77.8
Kacze	−	−	−	100.0
Smolak	4.4	−	−	95.6
Łękuk	68.7	3.7	4.5	23.1
Wolisko	19.6	5.5	2.7	72.3
Pilwąg	5.2	1.1	0.5	93.2
Szwałk Wielki	20.6	2.8	1.1	75.4
Ciche	2.7	−	−	97.3
Szwałk Mały	38.8	9.6	1.2	50.4
Łaźno	40.7	12.2	5.4	41.7
Litygajno	15.9	12.5	2.2	69.4
Dubinek	−	−	−	100.0

Table 3

Heavy metals in sediments arranged in order from the highest to the lowest concentration for a given metal

Lake	Order of heavy metals
Biała Kuta	Zn < Cu < Pb < Ni < Cd
Krzywa Kuta	Zn < Cu < Pb < Ni < Cd
Kacze	Zn < Pb < Cu < Ni = Cd
Smolak	Zn < Cu < Pb < Ni < Cd
Łękuk	Zn < Pb < Cu < Ni < Cd
Wolisko	Zn < Cu < Pb < Ni < Cd
Pilwąg	Zn < Cu < Pb < Ni < Cd
Szwałk Wielki	Zn < Cu < Pb < Ni < Cd
Ciche	Zn < Pb < Cu < Ni < Cd
Szwałk Mały	Zn < Cu < Pb < Ni < Cd
Łaźno	Cu < Zn < Pb < Ni < Cd
Litygajno	Zn < Pb < Cu < Ni < Cd
Dubinek	Zn < Cu < Ni < Pb < Cd

Table 4

The average content of heavy metals, total carbon (TC), total organic carbon (TOC), total inorganic carbon (TIC) in littoral sediments in lakes of Borecka Forest

Lake	Zn	Cu	Pb	Ni	Cd	TOC	TIC	TC
Lake	(mg kg⁻¹)					g C kg⁻¹
Biała Kuta	6.50	6.22	3.83	1.09	0.05	16.00	0.11	16.11
Krzywa Kuta	3.41	2.01	1.06	0.72	0.10	6.01	0.03	6.04
Kacze	42.35	15.60	26.77	0.64	0.64	494.46	0.22	494.68
Smolak	11.31	5.62	2.89	0.05	0.05	44.58	0.12	44.71
Łękuk	12.65	5.56	6.03	2.32	0.10	7.20	3.65	10.86
Wolisko	22.46	4.06	2.19	1.93	0.10	6.30	9.17	15.46
Pilwąg	19.78	10.61	2.88	1.64	0.15	41.96	7.16	49.12
Szwałk Wielki	5.80	3.70	1.29	0.85	0.14	12.17	0.03	12.20
Ciche	8.96	2.72	2.76	1.91	0.19	8.57	0.11	8.67
Szwałk Mały	0.62	2.55	0.89	1.35	1.25	15.56	0.04	15.60
Łaźno	3.46	6.31	1.90	1.43	0.14	9.79	15.11	24.90
Litygajno	8.06	3.54	4.08	1.82	0.10	22.95	0.74	23.69
Dubinek	27.3	14.3	6.57	12.1	0.05	50.30	10.42	60.72
Average	13.28	6.37	4.88	2.18	0.23	56.60	3.61	60.21
Min.	0.62	2.01	0.89	0.50	0.05	6.01	0.03	6.04
Max.	42.35	15.60	26.77	12.10	1.25	494.46	15.11	494.68
SD	±11.81	±4.42	±6.82	±3.03	±0.34	±132.47	±5.14	±131.65
V	112.44	144.03	71.54	71.74	68.76	42.73	70.19	45.74
GBP	73	7	15	5	0.5	−	−
GBE	67	39	17	68	0.1	−	−

SD – standard deviation; V – variability index [%]; GBP – geochemical background for Poland, GBE – geochemical background for the Earth’s crust.

Table 5

Geochemical criteria of sediment pollution assessment (Bojakowska 2001)

Metal	Classes of sediment pollution
	0	I	II	III	IV
	geochemical background	unpolluted	moderately polluted	polluted	strongly polluted
	(mg kg⁻¹)
Zinc (Zn)	73	200	500	1000	>1000
Copper (Cu)	7	40	100	200	>200
Lead (Pb)	15	30	100	200	>200
Nickel (Ni)	5	16	40	50	>50
Cadmium (Cd)	<0.5	1	3.5	6	>6

Table 6

Heavy metal pollution of littoral sediments from lakes in Borecka Forest

Lake	Zn	Cu	Pb	Ni	Cd	Sediment evaluation
Lake	Sediment purity classes					Sediment evaluation
Biała Kuta	0	0	0	0	0	geochemical background
KrzywaKuta	0	0	0	0	0	geochemical background
Kacze	0	I	I	0	I	unpolluted
Smolak	0	0	0	0	0	geochemical background
Łękuk	0	0	0	0	0	geochemical background
Wolisko	0	0	0	0	0	geochemical background
Pilwąg	0	I	0	0	0	unpolluted
Szwałk Wielki	0	0	0	0	0	geochemical background
Ciche	0	0	0	0	0	geochemical background
SzwalkMaly	0	0	0	0	II	moderately polluted
Łaźno	0	0	0	0	0	geochemical background
Litygajno	0	0	0	0	0	geochemical background
Dubinek	0	I	0	I	0	unpolluted

Table 7

Ecotoxicological assessment of sediments in rivers and lakes (Macdonald 1994, CCME 1999)

Metal	TEL	PEL
Metal	(mg kg^–1)
Zn	123	315
Cu	36	197
Pb	35	91
Ni	16	42
Cd	0.6	3.5

Table 8

Values of geoaccumulation indices (I_geo) of heavy metals in littoral sediments from lakes in Borecka Forest

Lake	Background	I_geo-Zn	I_geo-Cu	I_geo-Pb	I_geo-Ni	I_geo-Cd
Biała Kuta	GBP	−4.07	−0.76	−2.55	−2.78	−4.00
Biała Kuta	GBE	−3.95	−3.23	−2.74	−5.05	−1.67
KrzywaKuta	GBP	−5.01	−2.39	−4.41	−3.38	−2.97
KrzywaKuta	GBE	−4.88	−4.86	−4.59	−7.15	−0.64
Kacze	GBP	−1.37	0.57*	0.25*	−3.55	−0.23
Kacze	GBE	−1.25	−1.91	0.07*	−7.31	2.10***
Smolak	GBP	−3.28	−0.90	−2.96	−3.91	−3.91
Smolak	GBE	−3.15	−3.38	−3.14	−7.67	−1.58
Łękuk	GBP	−3.11	−0.92	−1.84	−1.69	−2.95
Łękuk	GBE	−2.99	−3.40	−2.02	−5.46	−0.63
Wolisko	GBP	−2.29	−1.37	−3.36	−1.96	−2.92
Wolisko	GBE	−2.16	−3.85	−3.54	−5.72	−0.60
Pilwąg	GBP	−2.47	0.02*	−2.97	−2.19	−2.33
Pilwąg	GBE	−2.35	−2.46	−3.15	−5.96	−0.01
Szwałk Wielki	GBP	−4.24	−1.50	−4.12	−3.14	−2.40
Szwałk Wielki	GBE	−4.11	−3.98	−4.31	−6.91	−0.08
Ciche	GBP	−3.61	−1.95	−3.03	−1.97	−1.97
Ciche	GBE	−3.49	−4.43	−3.21	−5.74	0.35*
SzwalkMaly	GBP	−7.46	−2.04	−4.66	−2.47	0.74*
SzwalkMaly	GBE	−7.34	−4.52	−4.84	−6.24	3.06****
Łaźno	GBP	−4.98	−0.73	−3.57	−2.39	−2.39
Łaźno	GBE	−4.86	−3.21	−3.75	−6.16	−0.07
Litygajno	GBP	−3.76	−1.57	−2.46	−2.04	−2.94
Litygajno	GBE	−3.64	−4.05	−2.64	−5.81	−0.61
Dubinek	GBP	−2.00	0.45*	−1.78	0.69*	−3.91
Dubinek	GBE	−1.88	−2.03	−1.96	−3.08	−1.58

* - unpolluted to moderately polluted sediments (class I);

*** - moderately to strongly polluted sediments (class III);

* - unpolluted to moderately polluted sediments (class I);

**** - strongly polluted sediments (class IV)

* - unpolluted to moderately polluted sediments (class I);

Table 9

Contamination factors (CF), the percentage of each metal in the total sediment contamination (%CF) with heavy metals in littoral sediments and the degree of sediment contamination (C_d)

Lake	Background	CF (Zn)	%CF (Zn)	CF (Cu)	%CF (Cu)	CF (Pb)	%CF (Pb)	CF (Ni)	%CF (Ni)	CF (Cd)	%CF (Cd)	?CF	Cd
Biała Kuta	GBP	0.09	5.8	0.89	57.5	0.26	16.5	0.22	14.1	0.09	6.1	1.54	0.31
Biała Kuta	GBE	0.10	10.0	0.16	16.5	0.23	23.3	0.02	1.7	0.47	48.6	0.97	0.19
Krzywa Kuta	GBP	0.05	6.3	0.29	38.8	0.07	9.5	0.14	19.5	0.19	25.9	0.74	0.15
Krzywa Kuta	GBE	0.05	4.5	0.05	4.5	0.06	5.5	0.01	0.9	0.96	84.6	1.14	0.23
Kacze	GBP	0.58	9.7	2.23*	37.1	1.78*	29.7	0.13	2.1	1.28*	21.4	6.00	1.20
Kacze	GBE	0.63	7.0	0.40	4.4	1.57*	17.4	0.01	0.1	6.41****	71.0	9.03	1.812)
Smolak	GBP	0.15	11.5	0.80	59.5	0.19	14.3	0.10	7.4	0.10	7.4	1.35	0.27
Smolak	GBE	0.17	17.0	0.14	14.6	0.17	17.2	0.01	0.7	0.50	50.5	0.99	0.20
Łękuk	GBP	0.17	8.5	0.79	38.8	0.42	20.5	0.46	22.7	0.19	9.5	2.05	0.41
Łękuk	GBE	0.19	11.1	0.14	8.4	0.37	21.7	0.03	2.0	0.97	56.9	1.71	0.34
Wolisko	GBP	0.31	19.0	0.58	35.9	0.15	9.0	0.39	23.9	0.20	12.2	1.62	0.32
Wolisko	GBE	0.34	21.1	0.10	6.6	0.13	8.1	0.03	1.8	0.99	62.4	1.59	0.32
Pilwąg	GBP	0.27	10.4	1.52*	58.2	0.19	7.4	0.33	12.6	0.30	11.4	2.60	0.52
Pilwąg	GBE	0.30	13.1	0.27	12.1	0.17	7.5	0.02	1.1	1.49*	66.2	2.25	0.45
Szwałk Wielki	GBP	0.08	6.9	0.53	46.0	0.09	7.5	0.17	14.8	0.28	24.7	1.15	0.23
Szwałk Wielki	GBE	0.09	5.1	0.09	5.6	0.08	4.5	0.01	0.7	1.42*	84.0	1.69	0.34
Ciche	GBP	0.12	8.4	0.39	26.6	0.18	12.6	0.38	26.2	0.38	26.2	1.46	0.29
Ciche	GBE	0.13	5.8	0.07	3.0	0.16	7.0	0.03	1.2	1.91*	82.9	2.30	0.46
Szwałk Mały	GBP	0.01	0.3	0.36	11.4	0.06	1.9	0.27	8.4	2.50*	78.1	3.20	0.64
Szwałk Mały	GBE	0.01	0.1	0.07	0.5	0.05	0.4	0.02	0.2	12.49****	98.8	12.64	2.533)
Łaźno	GBP	0.05	2.9	0.90	54.7	0.13	7.7	0.29	17.4	0.29	17.4	1.65	0.33
Łaźno	GBE	0.05	2.9	0.16	9.1	0.11	6.3	0.02	1.2	1.43*	80.5	1.78	0.36
Litygajno	GBP	0.11	7.6	0.51	34.9	0.27	18.8	0.36	25.1	0.20	13.5	1.45	0.29
Litygajno	GBE	0.12	8.3	0.09	6.2	0.24	16.5	0.03	1.8	0.98	67.2	1.46	0.29
Dubinek	GBP	0.37	7.0	2.04*	38.0	0.44	8.1	2.42*	45.0	0.10	1.9	5.37	1.07
Dubinek	GBE	0.41	22.2	0.37	19.9	0.39	21.0	0.18	9.7	0.50	27.2	1.84	0.37

* – moderate contamination level;

**** – very high contamination level;

2) – low contamination level;

* – moderate contamination level;

**** – very high contamination level;

3) – moderate contamination level

* – moderate contamination level;

The percentage of individual forms of carbon in the littoral sediments in lakes of Borecka Forest

Table 10

Values of Pearson’s correlation coefficients between heavy metals, TOC and TIC in sediments

	Zn	Cu	Pb	Ni	Cd	TOC	TIC
Zn	1
Cu	***0.85	1
Pb	***0.82	**0.73	1
Ni	0.34	0.49	0.03	1
Cd	0.00	0.00	0.24	−0.18	1
TOC	**0.78	**0.69	***0.97	−0.09	0.34	1
TIC	0.17	0.32	−0.14	0.46	−0.27	−0.18	1

*** significant at p<0.01 and 0.05, respectively

** significant at p<0.01 and 0.05, respectively

*** significant at p<0.01 and 0.05, respectively

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ohs-2016-0042 | Journal eISSN: 1897-3191 | Journal ISSN: 1730-413X

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 493 - 504

Submitted on: Jan 26, 2016

Accepted on: Mar 23, 2016

Published on: Dec 14, 2016

Published by: University of Gdańsk

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

Keywords:

Related subjects:

© 2016 Julita A. Dunalska, Zygmunt M. Gusiatin, Rafał Zieliński, Daniel Szymański, Justyna Sieńska, published by University of Gdańsk
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Volume 45 (2016): Issue 4 (December 2016)

Comparison of selected methods used in the assessment of contamination with heavy metals in littoral sediments of lakes

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Table 8

Table 9

Figure 2

Table 10

Paradigm

My account