Content uploaded by Karen Ghazaryan
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Karen Ghazaryan on Oct 10, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Arts & Sciences,
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934 :: 07(03):97–105 (2014)
Copyright c
2014 by UniversityPublications.net
MONITORING OF SOILS IN ECOLOGICALLY VULNERABLE MINING
AREAS AROUND SHAMLUGH TOWN IN ARMENIA
K. A. Ghazaryan, S. S. Avetisyan and N. A. Gevorgyan
Yerevan State University, Republic of Armenia
The physicochemical parameters of the soils around Shamlugh town and the degree of landdegradation
in this area were studied.Shamlugh town is situated in the north-east of the Republic of Armenia.The
location of the main sources of pollution considered, two of the most risky sites in this area
(surroundings of open mine and active tailing dam of) and an unpolluted site as a control were selected
for the study. The studies revealed that the surface of soils was well covered by vegetation in this area
and the naked soils generally made only 0-25% in all (only in three site observed a to 50% naked soils).
The studied soils are basically non eroded or weakly eroded (only in one site observed a medium level
of erosion) and they are classified from fine to medium according to texture (Clay Loam, Clay, Silty
Clay and Loam). In some soil samples much stoniness has been observed. At the time of studies the
root systems were comparatively well-developed almost in all soil samples. The pH of studied soil
samples was from slightly acidic to slightly alkaline. The content of humus ranged from 3.91 to
12.26 % in the upper A horizon. The study of pollution of soils with heavy metals and metalloids
revealed the significant increase in contents of the following metals: Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cr, Sr, Mo, Cd, Pb
compared with control sample. Experiments have led us to the assumption that pollution of soils with
mentioned elements in studied territory is conditioned by human activities, particularly by mining and
smelting industries.
Keywords: Heavy metals, Soil pollution, Landdegradation, Mining and metallurgical industries.
Introduction
Mining industry is a developed branch of the Armenian economy. Since the last decades of the 20th
century, the mining and beneficiation of a variety of minerals, in particular copper and gold, have been
the driving force behind economic development, particularly in Syunik and Lorimarzes (districts) ofRA.
Shamlugh town is situated in the north-east of Armenia (Lorimarz). Mining and smelting industry is
developed in this area. This economic sphere is one of the main sources of soil pollution with heavy
metals (Pb, Cu, Ni, Cd, As, Mo, etc) which are considered as dangerous pollutants causing the
desertification of soils [6].
In the environment, heavy metals at high concentration are toxic to most organisms. Heavy metals
are defined as elements with densities greater than 5 g/cm3[4]. Many studies have shown that heavy
metals are extremely persistent in the environment, non biodegradable and readily accumulate to toxic
levels [1, 7, 8, 11]. Even low concentrations of heavy metals are toxic because there is no good
mechanism for their elimination from a body. Human activities such as mining and metallurgical
industries have continuously increased the concentration of these metals in the environment (soils, waters,
97
98 Monitoring of Soils in Ecologically Vulnerable Mining Areas Around Shamlugh Town in Armenia
sediments) [9]. The presence of high amounts of heavy metals in the environment, induced by human
activity, is one of the most important tasks of the present environmental issues. Soils are usually regarded
as the ultimate sink for heavy metals discharged into the environment [3]. Heavy metals frequently
reported in literature with regards to potential hazards and occurrences in contaminated soils are Cd, Cr,
Pb, Zn, Fe and Cu [2]. The total content of elements depends on chemical and physical properties of both
the soil and the elements. The metal content in soil is a sum of metals originating from natural processes
and human activity. It is estimated that the contribution of metals from anthropogenic sources in soil is
higher than the contribution from natural ones [12]. Significant increases in soil metal content are found
in areas of high industrial activity where accumulation may be several times higher than the average
content in noncontaminated areas. Additionally, areas distant from industrial centres also show increased
metal concentrations due to long-range atmospheric transport. This fact has been observed by numerous
authors [13, 14].
The bioavailable metal content in soil exerts a decisive impact on soil quality and its use in food
production. According to soil parameters, heavy metals may enter the food chain in significantly elevated
amounts [10]. The heavy metals act upon the health either indirectly, by consuming vegetables grown on
contaminated soils, or directly by dust inhalation or drinking of contaminated water.
The aim of the present study was the monitoring of soils(particularly heavy metals) in ecologically
vulnerable mining areas around Shamlugh town in Armenia. The problem under study in this region is
very urgent and actual because it concerns the preservation of sensitive natural resources, prevention of
inadmissible contamination of food products and the protection of the health of inhabitants in this region.
Materials and Methods
The lands of the area belong to the type of mountain cambisol. In Armenia this soil type is distributed
500-1700 meters above sea level, and on arid southern slopes, it reaches up to 2400 meters [5]. The soils
of two riskiestsites of this region were studied (Figure 1):
1. surroundings of open mine near Shamlugh town (samples ʋʋ 1-16);
2. surroundings of Chochkan active tailing dam (samples ʋʋ 17-19).
Figure1. The map of Armenia showing two sampling areas.
The 19 sections of only horizon A of soil (0-20 cm) were done in selected sites. The control section
was done in the site which was2 km away from the open mine near Shamlugh town. The sections were
done manually. The coordinates of sampling sites were recorded by GPS.
K. A. Ghazaryan, S. S. Avetisyan and N. A. Gevorgyan 99
The sampling of soils was carried out in a traditional way, well-known in soil science. All labware
and sampling apparatus were pre-soaked in 5% nitric acid solution followed by distilled water for a day
prior to sampling for removing trace concentrations of metals.
The samples of soils were taken from a depth of 0-20 cm at 5 m intervals on a grid measuring 20 m x
20 m and with the center point of the grid at the sample location. After homogenization and removal of
unwanted content (stones, plant material, etc.),the samples were air-dried at room temperature, sieved to
pass a 1 mm mesh and stored in an all-glass jar for analysis of their properties.
The pH of the soil was measured potentiometrically with the pH-meter (Hanna, Checker).
Determination of soil texture was carried out by “Feel Method”.
The content of heavy metals was determined by means of “PG990”atomic-absorption spectrometer
(PG Instruments LTD, UK).
Results and Discussion
The data of field studies indicate that the 20 sections of soil can be classified into types and subtypes. The
main soil type in the study sites was the mountain cambisol with its subtypes. The main soil type in the
study sites was the mountain cambisol with its subtypes:
1. a) mountain cambisol, decalcified, with medium and high capacity (samples ʋʋ 1-8 and the
control sample),
b) mountaincambisol, decalcified,steppificated, with weak capacity, weakly eroded (samples ʋʋ
9-16);
2. mountaincambisol, calcareous, steppificated, with medium capacity, weakly eroded(samples ʋʋ
17-19).
The properties of studied objects are described hereinafter (Table 1). Decalcified mountain cambisol
is the first subtype with its two variations. Decalcified mountain cambisol is distributed in comparatively
high sites. This subtype of soils in the studied territories is distributed 937-1287 meters above sea level.
Calcareous mountain cambisol is the second subtype. This subtype of soils in the studied territories is
705-783 meters above sea level.The reliefs of the areas of the distribution of the two soil subtypes are
rather complex and disjointed, and the gradients of the slopes vary from 30 to 410.
The description of each section and their general properties clarified during the field studies are
presented in Table 1. According to data of studies, the soil surface was well covered by plants, and the
naked soils generally made 0-20% in all except the sections 1 and 11 where the 50% of surface is
uncovered and in the sections 10 and 17 where accordingly the 30 and 35% of surface was uncovered.
The main vegetation in surroundings of sections ʋ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 16 and control section was
presented by trees, and nearby the sections ʋ 6, 8,9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 19 - by herbages. The
studied soils were basically weakly eroded, except the sections 5 and 9 where due to good mechanical
composition of soil, sufficient vegetation and small surface gradient, the erosion processes weren’t
developed. The samples 1 and 15 in contrast to already mentioned were medium eroded, which was
conditioned by the bad mechanical composition of soil, the large surface gradient,the slope location and
the comparatively bad vegetation cover.
Table 1. The general characteristic of the sampling areas.
Sample
number
Soil type and
subtype Basin Sampling
coordinates
Surface
altitude
above sea
level
(m)
Surface
gradient Microrelief Soil surface cover
Erosio
n
degree
(0-4)
100 Monitoring of Soils in Ecologically Vulnerable Mining Areas Around Shamlugh Town in Armenia
01
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.17231ɳɳ
E 44.72758ɳɳ 1115 380Mounds
Trees - 30%,
shrubs - 5%,
herbage - 10%,
naked soil - 50%,
stones - 5%
3
02
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.17055ɳɳ
E 44.72913ɳɳ 1212 250Small
mounds
Trees - 60%,
shrubs - 10%,
herbage - 10%,
naked soil - 20%
1
03
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.17049ɳɳ
E 44.73263ɳɳ 1269 110Small
mounds
Trees - 60%,
shrubs - 15%,
herbage - 10%,
naked soil - 15%
1
04
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.17382ɳɳ
E 44.73255ɳɳ 1287 250Small
mounds
Trees - 45%,
shrubs - 10%,
herbage - 35%,
naked soil - 10%
1
05
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.17616ɳɳ
E 44.73605ɳɳ 1219 30Smooth
Trees - 40%,
shrubs - 15%,
herbage - 25%,
naked soil - 20%
0
06
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.17336ɳɳ
E 44.72726ɳɳ 1211 17 0Mounds
Trees - 35%,
shrubs - 5%,
herbage - 55%,
naked soil - 5%
1
07
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.17331ɳɳ
E 44.72525ɳɳ 1218 240Small
mounds
Trees - 55%,
shrubs - 5%,
herbage - 30%,
naked soil - 10%
1
08
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.17497ɳɳ
E 44.72288ɳɳ 1234 280Small
mounds
Trees - 40%,
shrubs - 10%,
herbage - 50%
1
09
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
E 41.17177ɳɳ
N 44.72540ɳɳ 1246 50Smooth
Trees - 15%,
herbage - 80%,
naked soil - 5%,
0
10
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.17057ɳɳ
E 44.72136ɳɳ 1210 100Smooth Herbage - 70%
naked soil - 30%, 1
11
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.16648ɳɳ
E 44.42787ɳɳ 1217 100Smooth
Trees - 20%,
herbage - 30%,
naked soil - 50%
1
12
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.16810ɳɳ
E 44.71713ɳɳ 1194 200Small
mounds
Trees - 50%,
shrubs - 20%,
herbage - 25%,
naked soil - 5%
1
13
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.16750ɳɳ
E 44.72103ɳɳ 1185 90Smooth
Trees - 20%,
shrubs - 30%,
herbage - 40%,
naked soil - 10%
1
14
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.16315ɳɳ
E 44.72528ɳɳ 1099 400Small
mounds
Trees - 15%,
shrubs - 10%,
herbage - 60%,
naked soil - 15%
1
15
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.161770ɳɳ
E 44.72785ɳɳ 1150 310Mounds
Trees - 10%,
shrubs - 20%,
herbage - 50%,
naked soil - 20%
2
K. A. Ghazaryan, S. S. Avetisyan and N. A. Gevorgyan 101
16
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N41.15866ɳɳ
E 44.72781ɳɳ 937 410Mounds
Trees - 50%,
shrubs - 20%,
herbage - 20%,
naked soil -10%
1
17
Calcareous
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.1812ɳɳ
E 44.8431ɳɳ 783 50Smooth
Trees - 15%,
herbage - 50%,
naked soil - 35%
1
18
Calcareous
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.1800ɳɳ
E 44.8185ɳɳ 720 80Small
mounds
Trees - 10%,
shrubs - 15%,
herbage - 65%,
naked soil - 20%
1
19
Calcareous
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.1812ɳɳ
E 44.8431ɳɳ 705 50Smooth
Trees - 20%,
shrubs - 5%,
herbage - 60%
naked soil - 15%,
1
Control
Decalcified
mountain
cambisol
Debed
river
N 41.17933ɳɳ
E 44.74795ɳɳ 1223 100 Small
mounds
Trees - 55%,
shrubs - 20%,
herbage - 15%,
naked soil - 10%
1
The general characteristic of the studied soils is presented in Table 2. Except the soil samples 01 and
07, the good quantitative ratio of clay – sand - silt was observed in other soil samples, therefore,according
to the texture classification,these soil sampleswere characterized as good, and the soil samples 01 and 07
were characterized as medium.Much stoniness was observed in the soil samples 01, 03, 06, and 14. The
soil samples 05, 08, 17, 18 and 19 had the best structural properties, and the soil samples 05 and 08 had
comparatively bad structural properties. The pH of the studied soil samples varied from acidic to slightly
alkaline and ranged from 5.27 to 8.46. The content of humus ranged from 3.91 to 12.26% in the upper A
horizon. The highest content of humus was observed in the section 04. The lowest content of humus was
in the section 01, where higher than medium erosion degree and comparatively bad developed vegetation
were observed (naked soil - 50%).
Table 2. The general characteristic of the studied soils.
Sample
number
Mechanical composition
Texture Texture
classification Stones Structure pH
Humus
content,
%
clay sand silt
01 25% 50% 25
% Loam Medium 2-5 mm -30%
5-20 mm -40%
>20 mm -30%
Granular weak
1-2mm -90%
2-5 mm -10%
5,27 3.91
02 40% 12% 48
%
Clay
Loam Good
2-5 mm -60%
5-20 mm -30%
>20 mm -10%
Granular cloddy
1-2 mm -45%
2-5 mm -45%
>5 mm -10%
7,33 7,21
03 70% 10% 20
% Clay Good
2-5 mm -50%
5-20 mm -30%
>20 mm -20%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -40%
2-5 mm -40%
>5 mm -20%
5,70 7,79
04 40% 20% 40
%
Clay
Loam Good
2-5 mm -70%
5-20 mm -25%
20 mm -5%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -50%
2-5 mm -40%
>5 mm -10%
5,83 12.26
05 80% 5% 15 Silty Good 2-5 mm -75%
5-20 mm -25%
Cloddy
1-2mm -10%
5,11 4,29
102 Monitoring of Soils in Ecologically Vulnerable Mining Areas Around Shamlugh Town in Armenia
% Clay 2-5 mm -40%
> 5 mm -50%
06 40% 20% 40
%
Clay
Loam Good
2-5 mm -50%
5-20 mm -35%
>20 mm -15%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -50%
2-5 mm -40%
>5 mm -10%
6,18 8,98
07 20% 50% 30
% Loam Medium 2-5 mm -50%
5-20 mm -40%
>20 mm -10%
Granular weak
1-2mm -90%
2-5 mm -10
7,83 4,41
08 80% 5% 15
% Clay Good
2-5 mm -60%
5-20 mm -30%
>20 mm -10%
Cloddy nutlike
1-2mm -15%
2-5 mm -40%
>5 mm -45%
7,66 4,32
09 40% 10% 50
%
Clay
Loam Good
2-5 mm -90%
5-20 mm -10%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -50%
2-5 mm -35%
>5 mm -15%
7,75 7,36
10 67% 13% 20
% Clay Good
2-5 mm -85%
5-20 mm -15%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -55%
2-5 mm -35%
> 5 mm -10%
7.85 6,00
11 40% 30% 30
%
Clay
Loam Good
2-5 mm -70%
5-20 mm -25%
>20 mm -5%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -40%
2-5 mm -50%
5 mm -10%
8,46 8,14
12 60% 25% 15
% Clay Good
2-5 mm -80%
5-20 mm -15%
> 20 mm -5%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -50%
2-5 mm -45%
> 5 mm -5%
7,71 5,56
13 70% 15% 15
% Clay Good 2-5 mm -85%
5-20 mm -15%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -45%
2-5 mm -40%
> 5 mm -15%
7,50 6,62
14 70% 10% 20
% Clay Good
2-5 mm -50%
5-20 mm -30%
20 mm -20%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -40%
2-5 mm -50%
>5 mm -10%
7,28 4,97
15 85% 0% 15
%
Silty
Clay Good
2-5 mm -60%
5-20 mm -30%
20 mm -10%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -60%
2-5 mm -35%
> 5 mm -5%
7,40 8,13
16 65% 30% 5% Clay Good
2-5 mm -65%
5-20 mm -25%
20 mm -10%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -55%
2-5 mm -35%
> 5 mm -10%
7,44 4,76
17 40% 15% 45
%
Clay
Loam Good
2-5 mm -65%
5-20 mm -35%
Cloddy nutlike
1-2mm -20%
2-5 mm -40%
>5 mm -40%
7,94 6,61
18 43% 16% 41
%
Clay
Loam Good
2-5 mm -70%
5-20 mm -30%
Cloddy
1-2mm -25%
2-5 mm -45%
> 5 mm -30%
7,89 6,58
19 42% 14% 44 Clay Good
2-5 mm -65%
5-20 mm -30%
>20 mm -5%
Cloddy nutlike
1-2mm -25%
2-5 mm -40%
7,84 6,52
K. A. Ghazaryan, S. S. Avetisyan and N. A. Gevorgyan 103
% Loam > 5 mm -35%
Control 72% 12% 16
% Clay Good
2-5 mm -50%
5-20 mm -40%
>20 mm -10%
Granular cloddy
1-2mm -40%
2-5 ʋʋ-45%
>5 mm -15%
5,64 7,75
The content (mg/kg) of some heavy metals in the studied samples of soil is presented in Table 3.
Since the contents of metals in soils are specific and depend on the compound of rocks producing the soil
and the conditions of soil formation, for the determination of pollution level, the obtained results were
compared to control sample which was considered as a background. The study revealed the appreciable
increase (1.5 to 6.6 times) in the contents of following heavy metals: Cu (samples ʋʋ 1-4, 6-19), Zn
(samples ʋʋ 1-2, 4, 10-11, 13-19), Pb (samples ʋʋ 5, 8, 10-11, 13-16, ), Ni (samples ʋʋ 17-18), Co
(samples ʋ 16).Compared to the control sample, the significant increase (approximately 6.6 times) in the
content of heavy metals was observed only for copper which was due to the high content of this metal in
ores (Table 4). In general, the soil samples ʋʋ1-3, 7, 10-19 were highly pollutedby Cu and to some
extent - by other metals, while the sample ʋʋ4-5 was not so much polluted.
Table 3. The content (mg/kg) of some heavy metals in the studied samples of soil.
Sample number Cu Zn Pb Ni Co
01 53.0 600.0 4.2 17.0 18.5
02 55.0 800.0 3.4 15.0 21.6
03 60.0 400.0 5.7 17.0 14.8
04 35.0 600.0 4.6 20.0 14.8
05 18.0 500.0 6.9 30.0 18.8
06 50.0 500.0 4.5 18.0 14.8
07 51.0 450.0 5.3 20.0 16.1
08 25.0 400.0 9.0 30.0 18.8
09 52.0 400.0 6.0 18.0 14.8
10 85.1 600.0 9.2 19.0 16.5
11 62.0 550.0 8.0 16.0 15.6
12 90.0 650.0 11.0 20.0 17.2
13 100.0 600.0 10.0 15.0 21.6
14 105.0 650.0 8.8 18.0 22.5
15 113.0 600.0 9.0 22.0 10.8
16 100.0 700.0 8.1 18.0 30.4
17 65.0 600.0 4.6 33.0 17.2
18 70.0 650.0 5.2 37.0 18.4
19 59.0 580.0 4.4 28.0 15.9
Control 17.0 400.0 4.3 21.0 16.7
Table 4. The degree of the exceedings of the background concentrations of heavy metals
(experimental variant/control)
Samplenumber Cu Zn Pb Ni Co
01 3.1 1.5 1.0 0.8 1.1
02 3.2 2.0 0.8 0.7 1.3
03 3.5 1.0 1.3 0.8 0.9
04 2.1 1.5 1.1 1.0 0.9
104 Monitoring of Soils in Ecologically Vulnerable Mining Areas Around Shamlugh Town in Armenia
05 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.4 1.1
06 2.9 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.9
07 3.0 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.0
08 1.5 1.0 2.1 1.4 1.1
09 3.1 1.0 1.4 0.9 0.9
10 5.0 1.5 2.1 0.9 1.0
11 3.6 1.4 1.9 0.8 0.9
12 5.3 1.6 2.6 1.0 1.0
13 5.9 1.5 2.3 0.7 1.3
14 6.2 1.6 2.0 0.9 1.3
15 6.6 1.5 2.1 1.0 0.6
16 5.9 1.8 1.9 0.9 1.8
17 3.8 1.5 1.1 1.6 1.0
18 4.1 1.6 1.2 1.8 1.1
19 3.5 1.5 1.0 1.3 1.0
Conclusion
It should be noted that such kind of heavy metal pollution of soils in the studied territory was directly due
to human activities, particularlymining and smelting industry. The variation of high pollution with Cu and
some heavy metals near the open mine and the surroundings of Chochkan active tailing dam was due to
the character of industrial activities, the moving direction of airstreams as well as the physicochemical
peculiarities of soils.Also, it is necessary to mention that comparatively low pollution of the northern and
eastern regions of the open mine may have been conditioned by the well-developed forest biomasses of
these regions and the high locationcompared tothe open mine, which are considered as hindering factors
for the movement of heavy metal containing dust to these regions and vice versa, in the southern and
western regions of the open mine and the surroundings of the tailing dam, where forest biomass density
was lower, the degree of the soil pollutionwith heavy metals was higher. It is necessary to state that this
issue becomes actual as the some parts of these highly polluted regions are inhabited by population, and
agriculture is highly developed there, therefore heavy metals can enter human body through soil-plant-
human or soil-plant-animal-human chain causing various diseases.
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the Young Scientists Support Program and the National Foundation of
Science and Advanced Technologies, in the frames of research projectʋ YSSP-13-47.
References
1. Adie G. U., Osibanjo O. Assessment of soil-pollution by slag from an automobile Battery manufacturing plant
in Nigeria. Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 3 (9), 2009, p. 239 – 250.
2. Akoto O., Ephraim J. H. &Darko G.Heavy metal pollution in surface soils in the vicinity of abundant raiway
servicing workshop in Kumasi, Ghana.Int. J. Environ. Res.2(4), 2008,p. 359–364.
3. Banat K. M., Howari F. M., Al-Hamada A. A. Heavy Metals in Urban Soils of Central Jordan: Should We
Worry about Their Environmental Risks? Environmental Research, 97, 2005, p. 258–273.
K. A. Ghazaryan, S. S. Avetisyan and N. A. Gevorgyan 105
4. Duffus J. H. Environmental Toxicology. Edward Arnold Ltd., London, 1980, 164 p.
5. Edilyan R.A. Atlas of Soils of the Republic of Armenia. Yerevan, 1990, 70 p. (in Russian).
6. Ghazaryan K., Movsesyan H., Ghazaryan N.,Grigoryan K. The ecological assessment of soils around Agarak
town. Biological Journal of Armenia, 65(1), 2013, p. 39-43.
7. Grzebisz W, Ciesla L, Komisarek J, Potarzycki. J. Geochemical assessment of heavy metals pollution of urban
soils. Polish J. Environ. Stud., 11(5), 2002,p. 493–499.
8. Ma L.Q., Komar K. M., Tu C., Zhang W., Cai Y., Kenelly E.D. A fern that Hyper accumulatesarsenic. Nature,
409, 2001, p. 579-582.
9. Martin A. C., Rivers V. C., Marin M. T. Contamination by heavy metals in soils in the neighborhood of a
scrapyard of discarded vehicles. Sci. Total Environ., 212, 1998,p. 142-152.
10. Metcheva R., Yurukova L., Bezrukov V., Betcheva M., Yankov Y., Dimitrov K. Trace and toxic metals
accumulation in food chain representatives at Livingston Island (Antarctica). Int. J. Biol., 2(1), 2010,p. 155–
161.
11. Moosavi M. H., Zarasvandi A. Geochemistry of urban soils in the Masjed-i-Soleiman (MIS) city, Khuzestan
Province, Iran:Environmentals Marks. Res. J. Environ. Sci., 3(3), 2009, p. 392-399.
12. Nriagu J. O., Pacyna J. M. Quantitative assessment of worldwide contamination of air, water and soils by trace
metals. Nature 333, 1988, p.134– 9.
13. Saur E., Juste C. Enrichment of trace elements from long-range aerosol transport in sandy podzolic soils of
Southwest France. Water Air Soil Pollut., 73, 1994, p. 235– 46.
14. Steinnes E., Allen R. O., Petersen H. M., Rambæk J. P., Varskog P. Evidence of large scale heavy-metal
contamination of natural surface soils in Norway from long-range atmospheric transport. Sci. Total
Environ.,205, 1997, p. 255– 66.
