基于GCM_CB模型的土壤重金屬污染評價

摘要: 灰色聚類法已經(jīng)運用于土壤重金屬污染評價中,然而此法在確定聚類權(quán)重時僅考慮重金屬濃度,忽略了衡量重金屬毒性強弱的重要指標生物毒性指數(shù)。為了更客觀和準確地反映土壤重金屬的污染程度,將生物毒性指數(shù)引入到聚類指標權(quán)重中,構(gòu)建GCMCB(grey clustering method_concentration and biotoxicity)土壤重金屬污染評價模型。

中文摘要:

灰色聚類法已經(jīng)運用于土壤重金屬污染評價中,然而此法在確定聚類權(quán)重時僅考慮重金屬濃度,忽略了衡量重金屬毒性強弱的重要指標生物毒性指數(shù)。為了更客觀和準確地反映土壤重金屬的污染程度,將生物毒性指數(shù)引入到聚類指標權(quán)重中,構(gòu)建GCMCB(grey clustering method_concentration and biotoxicity)土壤重金屬污染評價模型。通過對華東某地區(qū)的10個區(qū)域土壤重金屬污染進行分析評價,并與常用評價方法對比研究,表明:其多數(shù)樣點的評價結(jié)果基本一致,但針對樣品4和樣品9中的元素Hg,因其強毒性,使得評價等級由I級定為II級,從而提高了評價方法的靈敏度,更加符合該區(qū)域的實際土壤污染情況。

英文摘要:

Grey clustering method has been applied to the evaluation of soil heavy metal pollution.However,in the process of drawing clustering weights,this method only considers the heavy metal concentration and ignors its biotoxicity index which is an important indicator to measure the toxicity intensity of the heavy metal.In order to reflect the pollution levels of soil heavy metal more objectively and accurately,biotoxicity index was introduced into the clustering weights to build the GCM CB soil heavy metal pollution evaluation model.Soil heavy metal data of 10 areas in eastern China were estimated,appraised and compared with other results evaluated by common evaluation methods.The conclusion is that the majority results are basically same except for sample 4 and sample 9.Their pollution level is changed from level I to level II for the element Hg with high toxicity,which improves the sensitivity of the evaluation method and makes it more coincided with the actual soil contamination of the area.

聲明：轉(zhuǎn)載此文是出于傳遞更多信息之目的。若有來源標注錯誤或侵犯了您的合法權(quán)益，請作者持權(quán)屬證明與本網(wǎng)聯(lián)系，我們將及時更正、刪除，謝謝。

  使用微信“掃一掃”功能添加“谷騰環(huán)保網(wǎng)”

如果需要了解更加詳細的內(nèi)容，請點擊下載 201407171627500610.zip 
        下載該附件請登錄，如果還不是本網(wǎng)會員，請先注冊