JEQ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Related articles in JEQ
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (11)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sowder, A. G.
Right arrow Articles by Morris, P. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sowder, A. G.
Right arrow Articles by Morris, P. J.
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Sowder, A. G.
Right arrow Articles by Morris, P. J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Mixed Wastes
Right arrow Radionuclides
Right arrow Heavy Metals

Partitioning and Availability of Uranium and Nickel in Contaminated Riparian Sediments

Andrew G. Sowdera, Paul M. Bertsch*,a and Pamela J. Morrisb

a Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, The Univ. of Georgia, Drawer E, Aiken, SC 29802
b Marine Biomedicine and Environmental Sciences, Medical Univ. of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425



View larger version (33K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Savannah River Site (SRS) and study site location map. The SRS lies in the upper Atlantic Coastal Plain along the Savannah River in South Carolina. Past discharges of process wastewater to Tims Branch resulted in extensive contamination of sediments downstream from the M-Area sewer outfall, including sediments within the Steed Pond basin. Sediment sampling locations for Steed Pond (SP) and uncontaminated reference sites, that is, upper Tims Branch (TB00) and Boggy Gut (BG), are indicated on the SRS map and M-Area inset.

 


View larger version (45K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Distribution of (a) U and (b) Ni in whole, sand, and water-dispersible silt and clay fractions of SP2B1 (12.7 g kg-1 sediment organic carbon [SOC]) and SP5B1 (82.2 g kg-1 SOC). Error bars are one standard deviation (n = 3). Significantly different means ({alpha} = 0.05) are distinguished by lowercase letters for SP2B1 distributions as determined by one-way analysis of variance and post hoc mean comparisons using Tukey and Scheffe tests. Uranium and nickel distributions in SP5B1 are not significantly different among the four size fractions. Legend applies to both graphs.

 


View larger version (150K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. (a) Scanning electron microscope (SEM) image with corresponding energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectra of representative clay sized particles in SP1B1 clay size fraction. Region "Fe" illustrates a typical iron-oxide coating with substitution of Ti and Mn. Region "k" corresponds to underlying kaolinite matrix. (b) SEM image of a large aggregate encountered in SP2B1 water-dispersible silt fraction. (c) SEM image of a Ni phase with Cu- and Ni-rich region indicated. Both metals are anthropogenic in origin. Phases such as this one may represent source term artifacts, surviving decades of weathering, or the resulting secondary weathering products.

 


View larger version (36K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. Ratio of metals concentrations in ammonium oxalate (AO) and citrate–dithionite (CD) extractions for (a) Fe, Mn, and Ti and (b) Al as the chief constituents of upland soil and Steed Pond sediment coatings. Error bars are one standard deviation (n = 3).

 


View larger version (32K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5. Comparison of sequential extraction profiles performed with and without hydroxylamine–HCl (HA) for (a) U and (b) Ni. Arrows indicate apparent redistributions of U and Ni to subsequent extraction stages following omission of HA step. Sequential extractions with HA step were performed in duplicate only (n = 2). Cumulative metal concentrations extracted are presented in Table 6. Error bars are one standard deviation (n = 3) for non-HA sequential extraction. Legend applies to both graphs.

 


View larger version (25K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6. Sequential extraction results for Steed Pond sediments for (a) U, (b) Ni, (c) Fe, (d) Mn, and (e) Al. Sequential extractions were performed without hydroxylamine–HCl (HA) step. Data columns within each sequential extraction fraction are presented by increasing sediment organic carbon content (i.e., SP2B1, SP1B2, SP1B1, and SP5B1). Cumulative metal concentrations extracted are presented in Table 6. Error bars are one relative standard deviation (n = 3). Legend applies to all graphs.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Soil Science Society of America Journal Journal of Plant Registrations The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2003 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.