华东师范大学学报（自然科学版） >

2020 , Vol. 2020 >Issue 1: 150 - 158

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.201841032

河口海岸学

上海城市内河中有机碳含量的时空变化及影响因素分析

  • 朱坤 ,
  • 吴莹 ,
  • 齐丽君
展开
  • 华东师范大学 河口海岸学国家重点实验室, 上海 200241

收稿日期: 2018-11-12

  网络出版日期: 2020-01-13

基金资助

国家自然科学基金（41530960）

收起

Spatiotemporal variations and influencing factors of organic carbon content in the urban rivers of Shanghai

  • ZHU Kun ,
  • WU Ying ,
  • Qi Lijun
Expand
  • State Key Laboratory of Estuarine and Coastal Research, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China

Received date: 2018-11-12

  Online published: 2020-01-13

Fold

摘要

2015年12月至2016年12月间，对苏州河、黄浦江4个固定站点的表层水样进行逐月采集，测定溶解态有机碳（dissolved organic carbon，DOC）和颗粒态有机碳（particulate organic carbon，POC）的含量，结合总悬浮颗粒物（total suspended matter，TSM）和稳定碳同位素（δ13C）等参数，研究有机碳的时空变化，并对其影响因素进行初步分析.结果显示，苏州河非汛期时上游DOC质量浓度（4.52 ±0.48 mg·L–1）明显高于下游（3.66 ±0.32 mg·L–1），而汛期上下游DOC质量浓度无明显差异，推测在汛期与非汛期DOC在上下游输送过程中的停留时间不同可能是DOC空间分布存在差异的主要因素.苏州河汛期颗粒物δ13C （–29.1‰ ±1.0‰）比非汛期（–28.1‰ ±0.6‰）更负，表明汛期浮游生物的生长对POC贡献更大.苏州河汛期与非汛期POC质量分数（POC%）则无明显差异，但非汛期POC%平均值（6.01%±2.27%）略高于汛期（4.10%±0.99%）.黄浦江DOC （年平均值3.56 ±0.31 mg·L–1）和POC%（年平均值2.18%±0.56%）上下游差异不明显，DOC呈现冬高夏低的特征.汛期更负的δ13C （–28.1‰ ±0.9‰）与更低的TSM （79.1 ±26.4 mg·L–1）显示黄浦江汛期时主要受到了太湖来水的影响，POC%表现出汛期高、非汛期低的特征.两条河的有机碳输送均以DOC输送为主，水体自净能力的差异使得苏州河DOC/POC变化范围大于黄浦江.从历史数据比对分析来看，2005—2016年黄浦江DOC质量浓度逐渐降低，一定程度上表明了污水治理三期工程对黄浦江的有机污染治理初显成效，但总有机碳（total organic carbon，TOC）质量浓度的高值表明黄浦江有机污染仍处于较高水平.

关键词： 黄浦江; 苏州河; 稳定碳同位素; 溶解有机碳; 颗粒有机碳

本文引用格式

朱坤 , 吴莹 , 齐丽君 . 上海城市内河中有机碳含量的时空变化及影响因素分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2020 , 2020(1) : 150 -158 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.201841032

Abstract

Surface water samples were collected monthly from four sites in Suzhou River and Huangpu River from December 2015 to December 2016. We analyzed the concentration of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and particulate organic carbon (POC) along with total suspended matter (TSM) and stable carbon isotope (δ13C) to understand the spatial and temporal variations in Suzhou River and Huangpu River. During the dry season, the DOC concentration of upstream sections of Suzhou River (4.52 ±0.48 mg·L-1) was higher than the downstream sections (3.66 ±0.32 mg·L-1), while there was no significant difference between the upstream and downstream sections during the flood season. Different retention times for DOC transportation for the upstream sections relative to the downstream sections might be a major factor for the spatial distribution of DOC. The δ13C (-29.1‰ ±1.0‰) during the flood season was more negative than the dry season (-28.1‰ ±0.6‰), indicating the significant contribution from plankton in the flood season. The mass fraction of POC (POC%) showed no significant differences between the flood and dry seasons, but the POC% in the dry season (6.01% ±2.27%) was still higher than the flood season (4.10% ±0.99%). The DOC concentration and POC% in Huangpu River showed no obvious differences the upstream and downstream sections; however, DOC showed higher concentration during the winter and lower concentration during the summer. The lower TSM (79.1 ±26.4 mg·L-1) and more negative δ13C (-28.1‰ ±0.9‰) in the flood season suggested that the Huangpu River was affected mainly by the water discharge from Taihu Lake during the flood season; POC% in the flood season was higher than the dry season. DOC was the dominant fraction of organic carbon in the two rivers, and the difference in the water self-purification capacity between two urban rivers resulted in the difference of DOC/POC variation range. The gradual decrease in the DOC concentration of the Huangpu River during the period from 2005-2016 indicates that the third phase of sewage treatment projects achieved initial effectiveness in controlling organic pollution of the Huangpu River, but the high concentration of total organic carbon (TOC) indicates that the organic pollution in Huangpu River was still at a relative high level.

Key words： Huangpu River; Suzhou River; stable carbon isotope; dissolved organic carbon; particulate organic carbon

参考文献

[1] 段文松, 许志恒, 郝敏, 等. 城市内河黑臭水体中溶解性有机物特性[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2018, 41(7):14-20
[2] WANG X, WANG S, PENG G, et al. Ecological restoration for river ecosystems:Comparing the Huangpu River in Shanghai and the Hudson River in New York[J]. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 2015, 1(7):1-14.
[3] 王绍祥, 朱建荣. 不同潮型和风况下青草沙水库取水口盐水入侵来源[J]. 华东师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2015(4):65-76
[4] 阮仁良. 上海市水资源和水环境的可持续发展[J]. 水资源保护, 2003(1):21-24. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1004-6933.2003.01.006
[5] LEDESMA J L J, KÖHLER S J, FUTTER M N. Long-term dynamics of dissolved organic carbon:implications for drinking water supply[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2012, 432:1-11. DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.05.071.
[6] 董倩倩, 张艾, 李咏梅, 等. 黄浦江溶解有机质光学特性与消毒副产物NDMA生成潜能的关系[J]. 环境科学, 2014, 35(3):958-963
[7] WEISHAAR J L, AIKEN G R, BERGAMASCHI B A, et al. Evaluation of specific ultraviolet absorbance as an indicator of the chemical composition and reactivity of dissolved organic carbon[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2003, 37(20):4702-4708.
[8] SELEMANI J R, ZHANG J, WU Y, et al. Distribution of organic carbon:possible causes and impacts in the Pangani River Basin ecosystem, Tanzania[J]. Environmental Chemistry, 2018, 15(3):137-149. DOI:10.1071/EN17185.
[9] 董秉直, 曹达文, 范瑾初, 等. 黄浦江水源的溶解性有机物分子量分布变化的特点[J]. 环境科学学报, 2001(5):553-556. DOI:10.3321/j.issn:0253-2468.2001.05.009
[10] 方华, 吕锡武, 朱晓超, 等. 黄浦江原水中有机物组成与特性[J]. 东南大学学报(自然科学版), 2007(3):495-499. DOI:10.3321/j.issn:1001-0505.2007.03.028
[11] 崔莹, 吴莹, 邵亮, 等. 苏州河、黄浦江水体中有机物、营养盐季节变化及其环境效应[J]. 环境化学, 2011, 30(3):645-651
[12] DONG Q, LI P, HUANG Q, et al. Occurrence, polarity and bioavailability of dissolved organic matter in the Huangpu River, China[J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2014, 26(9):1843-1850. DOI:10.1016/j.jes.2014.06.020.
[13] LETSCHER R T, HANSELL D A, KADKO D. Rapid removal of terrigenous dissolved organic carbon over the Eurasian shelves of the Arctic Ocean[J]. Marine Chemistry, 2011, 123(1):78-87.
[14] WU Y, DITTMAR T, LUDWICHOWSKI K U, et al. Tracing suspended organic nitrogen from the Yangtze River catchment into the East China Sea[J]. Marine Chemistry, 2007, 107(3):367-377. DOI:10.1016/j.marchem.2007.01.022.
[15] 张婷婷, 姚鹏, 王金鹏, 等. 调水调沙对黄河下游颗粒有机碳输运的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2015, 36(8):2817-2826
[16] 张玉龙, 冉勇. 珠江中下游颗粒有机质的碳氮℃稳定同位素、氨基酸和木质素组成及其地球化学意义[J]. 地球化学, 2014, 43(2):114-121
[17] 张海春, 胡雄星, 韩中豪. 黄浦江水系水质变化及原因分析[J]. 中国环境监测, 2013, 29(4):55-59. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-6002.2013.04.012
[18] ZHOU Z, LIU S, ZHONG G, et al. Flood disaster and flood control measurements in Shanghai[J]. Natural Hazards Review, 2016, 18(1):B5016001.
[19] SONG K S, ZANG S Y, ZHAO Y, et al. Spatiotemporal characterization of dissolved carbon for inland waters in semi-humid/semi-arid region, China[J]. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 2013, 17(10):4269-4281. DOI:10.5194/hess-17-4269-2013.
[20] 于灏, 吴莹, 张经, 等. 长江流域植物和土壤的木质素特征[J]. 环境科学学报, 2007(5):817-823. DOI:10.3321/j.issn:0253-2468.2007.05.019
[21] HEDGES J I, CLARK W A, QUAY P D, et al. Compositions and fluxes of particulate organic material in the Amazon River[J]. Limnology and Oceanography, 1986, 31(4):717-738. DOI:10.4319/lo.1986.31.4.0717.
[22] TAN F C, EDMOND J M. Carbon isotope geochemistry of the Orinoco Basin[J]. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 1993, 36(6):541-547. DOI:10.1006/ecss.1993.1033.
[23] 顾笑迎, 由文辉. 苏州河浮游植物群落结构与水质评价[J]. 海洋湖沼通报, 2008(1):66-73. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-6482.2008.01.010
[24] 吴晓敏, 郝瑞娟, 潘宏博, 等. 黄浦江浮游动物群落结构及其与环境因子的关系[J]. 生态环境学报, 2018, 27(6):1128-1137
[25] MEYBECK M. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus transport by world rivers[J]. American Journal of Science, 1982, 282(4):401-450. DOI:10.2475/ajs.282.4.401.
[26] WU Y, BAO H Y, UNGER D, et al. Biogeochemical behavior of organic carbon in a small tropical river and estuary, Hainan, China[J]. Continental Shelf Research, 2013, 57:32-43. DOI:10.1016/j.csr.2012.07.017.
[27] 乐成峰, 李云梅, 查勇, 等. 太湖悬浮物对水体生态环境的影响及其高光谱反演[J]. 环境科学学报, 2008(10):2148-2155. DOI:10.3321/j.issn:0253-2468.2008.10.034
[28] 陶思圆.三峡澎溪河回水区悬浮颗粒物组成及其沉降特性研究[D].重庆:重庆大学, 2015.
[29] WU Y, ZHANG J, LIU S M, et al. Sources and distribution of carbon within the Yangtze River system[J]. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 2007, 71(1/2):13-25.
[30] 赵维光. 污水治理三期总管贯通[N]. 文汇报, 2007-01-24(001).
[31] 李晨, 王莹, 刘佳. 滦河水中总有机碳(TOC)与化学需氧量(CODcr)相关性研究[J]. 天津科技, 2017, 44(7):95-97. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-8945.2017.07.033
[32] 李小如. 广州市区河涌水中总有机碳与化学需氧量的相关性研究[J]. 广东轻工职业技术学院学报, 2006, 5(2):14-15. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-1950.2006.02.005
[33] 林建荣. 长江口, 珠江口溶解有机碳的行为与通量[D]. 福建厦门:厦门大学, 2007.
[34] 陈艳. 超滤膜处理地表原水实用化试验研究[D].上海:同济大学, 2007.
[35] 李伟, 徐斌, 夏圣骥, 等. DON的水处理特性及生成NDMA潜能的分析[J]. 中国给水排水, 2009, 25(17):35-38. DOI:10.3321/j.issn:1000-4602.2009.17.009
[36] GUO W, YANG L, ZHAI W, et al. Runoff-mediated seasonal oscillation in the dynamics of dissolved organic matter in different branches of a large bifurcated estuary-The Changjiang Estuary[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research:Biogeosciences, 2014, 119(5):776-793. DOI:10.1002/2013JG002540.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉