See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/335771114

Baseline measurements of 210Po and 210Pb in the seafood of Kasimedu

fishing harbour, Chennai, South East Coast of India and related dose to
population

Article  in  Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology · September 2019

DOI: 10.1016/j.enceco.2019.09.001

CITATIONS READS

5 160

3 authors:

Dr. M. Saiyad Musthafa Prof. Kantha Deivi Arunachalam

The New College (Autonomous) SRM Institute of Science and Technology
35 PUBLICATIONS   230 CITATIONS    122 PUBLICATIONS   2,040 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Darul Raiyaan
SRM Institute of Science and Technology
7 PUBLICATIONS   8 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Future of Modern Environmental Materials Management View project

“Estimation of site specific factor, mutation and dose response of natural radionuclides on aquatic biota from Kayamkulam Estuary, HBRA, Kerala – Eco-friendly
remedial measures using Agro Waste” View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dr. M. Saiyad Musthafa on 06 November 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology 1 (2019) 43–48

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology

journal homepage: www.keaipublishing.com/en/journals/environmental-chemistry-
and-ecotoxicology/

Baseline measurements of 210Po and 210Pb in the seafood of Kasimedu

fishing harbour, Chennai, South East Coast of India and related dose
to population
⁎
M. Saiyad Musthafa a, , Kantha Deivi Arunachalam b, G.I. Darul Raiyaan b
a
Unit of Research in Radiation Biology & Environmental Radioactivity, P.G. & Research Department of Zoology, The New College, University of Madras, Chennai 600014,
Tamilnadu, India
b
Center for Environmental Nuclear Research, Directorate of Research, SRM University, Kattankulathur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 603203, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: The Bioaccumulation studies of natural radionuclides such as 210Po & 210Pb was carried out to explain the radiation
Received 14 August 2019 levels of Kasimedu fishing harbour, Chennai, southeast coast of India. Abiotic components like water, sediment and
Received in revised form 5 September 2019 biotic components (Fish species: Synagris japonicas, Megalapsis cordyla, Engraulis indicus and Sciaena aneus) crustaceans
Accepted 5 September 2019
(Shrimp species: Fenneropenaeus indicus and Fenneropenaeus monodon; Crab species: Scylla serrata and Portunus
Available online 11 September 2019
sanguinolentus), were taken as experimental samples. The observed concentration of natural radionuclide 210Po was
Keywords:
3.6 mBq·L−1, and 210Pb was 1.90 m mBq·L−1 in the water samples of Kasimedu fishing harbour and the concentration
Kasimedu fishing harbour of 210Po was 21.3 Bq kg−1 and 210Pb was 35.7 Bq kg−1 in sediment samples. The higher accumulation rates of 210Po &
210
Natural radionuclides Pb were observed in crustacean crab species Scylla serrata than in other biotic samples shows that, it can be used as a
Concentration factor bioindicator for radionuclides in the Kasimedu fishing harbour. The concentration factor of 210Po ranged from
Seafood 6.5 × 10 3 to 9.3 × 10 5 but for 210 Pb ranged from 3.8 × 10 3 to 4.8 × 10 5 . The acquired effective dose
for population was calculated and the results were discussed in the range from 30.1 to 630.8 μSv/year for 210Po
and 22.7–287.5 μSv/year for 210Pb.

1. Introduction
Assessment of radioactive elements in the natural environment and
their effects on living organisms considered as one of the most important is-
sues in radioecology and radiological protection in recent years. Aquatic or-
ganisms are capable of concentrating various toxic elements, includes
radionuclides within their tissues, eventhough the concentrations of most
of these elements or radionuclides in the medium occur at ultra-trace levels
[1–3]. The radionuclides 210Pb with a half-life of 22.3 years and 210Po with
a half-life of 138.4 days are the last radioactive members of the 238U series.
The distribution and levels of 210Pb, 210Po and 226Ra has been widely stud-
ied in this living planet and particularly in the dwelling environment.
[4–6]. Nowadays, several researchers from different regions of the world
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: saiyad_musthafa@rediffmail.com. (M.S. Musthafa).
are actively involved in the assessment of 210Pb and 210Po in seafood and
its dose to population (Khan and Wesley, 2011) [7–14,52].
1.1. Lead-210 and Polonium-210
Lead-210 is a universal element generally found in all living and non-
living constituents and it was is firmly acquired by biotic components,
passed via food through tropic chains. Moreover, human had received the
radiation dose indirectly due to consumption of marine species [15–17].
The intake of sea foods containing radioactive substances, inclusive of
fishes, sea weeds and other by products are normally an important pathway
of exposure. The concentration of radionuclides in the edible marine flora
and fauna are many folds higher than the environmental matrices because
of bio-magnification process. Alpha emitters are considered as one of the
most important natural radionuclides occurring in ocean which leads to po-
tential internal radiation exposure on living tissues. A major range of radi-
ation dose received by marine animals comes from the members of the
naturally occurring U series acquired in the body as 210Po [18]. The α-
emitting radionuclides, 210Po contributes the major dose of radiation to ma-
rine biotic [19]. The considerable energy of its high LET alpha radiation
(5.305 MeV) 210Po is highly radiotoxic by internal contamination

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enceco.2019.09.001
2590-1826/© 2019 The Authors. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf
of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-
NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
M.S. Musthafa et al.
[20,21], a fact that the notorious murder of the former Soviet spy Alexander
Litvinenko in 2006 [22]. Polonium-210 is of particular interest not only in
public health, but also in forensic investigations [23] as an environmental
tool for geochemical and radio-ecological purposes [24].
The food chain is the major pathway for bio accumulation of 210Po in
marine organisms [25]. The concentration of 210Po differs from species to
species, for eg., in wet weight of animals such as Fish: 2.4 Bq kg−1, Mol-
luscs: 15 Bq kg−1, and in Crustaceans: 6 Bq kg−1 was considered as average
“global” concentration of polonium [26], even the concentration varies
from organs to organs or tissues such as, the fish has the highest 210Po
level in digestive tract compared to mollusk digestive tract and hepatopan-
creas of crustaceans [17,27,28].
On March 2011 in Japan, Fukushima nuclear reactor explosion accident
has happened due to an earthquake and tsunami. Afterwards, an extensive
study was undertaken by researchers to find out the leaching of radionu-
clides and Fukushima-derived possible health impairments in resident ma-
rine animals, migratory Pacific bluefin tuna (PBFT), seafood and seafood
consumers. Inversely, activity concentration in marine biotic and doses to
population was dominated by naturally occurring alpha-emitter 210Po
around 3–4 magnitude than Fukushima-derived doses [29]. The present
study area is situated nearly 70 km from Kalpakkam Atomic Power Plant.
Owing these factors, the baseline assessment of natural radionuclide
210
Po & 210Pb concentration in seafood and its effective dose to population
is very imperative in and around Kasimedu fishing harbour, South East
Coast of India.
2. Methodology
2.1. Location of studies
Kasimedu fishing harbour (13° 7′ 43″ N and 80° 17′ 59″ E) is a major fish
landing centre of Tamil Nadu (Fig. 1) where organized fish auctioning
began in 1970. About 200 t of capture fishery from East Coast (Bay of Ben-
gal) is landing every day. The study area is located near the mouth of
Cooum river, which is considered to be the most polluted river of South
India. The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board nominated three major in-
dustries as the polluters of Cooum river namely Chennai Petroleum Corpo-
ration, Madras Fertilizers and Ennore Thermal Power station. To the North,
Kosasthalai river is draining near the Ennore Creek to about 11 km away
from Kasimedu. Another river named Adyar is mixing with Bay of Bengal
near Foreshore Estate, Adyar river is at a distance of 12.2 km south from
Kasimedu.
2.2. Sample collection and process
Sample of water, sediments, fishes (Synagris japonicas, Megalapsis
cordyla, Engraulius indicus and Sciaenaaneus) crustaceans (Shrimp species:
Fenneropenaeus indicus and Fenneropenaeus monodon; Crab species: Scylla
serrata and Portunus sanguinolentus) were collected from the Kasimedu fish-
ing harbour and sampling was done for seven times separately.
Water samples (100 L; 50 L for 210Po & remaining 50 L for 210Po analy-
sis respectively) were collected using Van Dorn water sampler, immedi-
ately samples were brought to the laboratory for further analysis. In the
laboratory, samples were filtered through pre-weighed membrane filter
paper (0.45 mm pore size, 47 mm diameter) with a flow rate less than
10 mL min−1.
Sediment samples were collected using Van-Veen Grab sampler and
were dried at 60 °C in a hot air oven for 24 h, grounded into fine powder
using mortar and pestle and filtered it through 150 μm sieves and 50 g of
homogenized samples were taken for further analysis.
Biotic samples were collected from local fishermen using gill net of var-
ious sizes from Kasimedu fishing harbour. Samples were labeled, preserved
using ice and transported to the laboratory. Samples were thoroughly
washed with Mili-Q water to remove unwanted micro particles associated
with radionuclide materials. The samples of muscles and tissues was oven
dried at 110 °С, powdered with pestle and mortar and stored until chemical
44
Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology 1 (2019) 43–48
analysis has been done. Homogenized samples (50 ± 0.5 g) were taken for
further analysis.
2.2.1. 210Po assay
Abiotic (water & sediment) and biotic samples were processed by stan-
dard protocols [30]. The electrochemical deposition of 210Po over the silver
discs followed as per the standard protocol recommended by Flynn [31] as
modified by Iyengar et al. [32]. Silver discs were used for the determination
of alpha emission by Alpha radiation counting system calibrated by 239Pu
reference.
2.2.2. 210Pb assay
The activity concentration of 210Pb in the abiotic and biotic samples of
Kasimedu fishing harbour, were determined using standard protocols rec-
ommended by Iyengar et al. [32] and Kamath et al. [33]. β-emission was
assessed by gas flow type Geiger Muller Low background β-radiation
counting system and its efficiency (40%) calibrated using 40K standard
sources [30].
2.2.3. Concentration ratio (Cr)
The concentration ratio (Cr) of 210Pb and 210Po in the biotic samples of
Kasimedu fishing harbour, were determined using the following formula:
Concentration Ratio ðC r Þ ¼
Activity concentration of 210Po ðorÞ 210Pb in organisms as Bq kg‐l
Activity concentration of 210Po ðorÞ 210
Pb filtered in water as Bq L‐1
ð1Þ
2.2.4. Population dose evaluation
Population dose due to ingestion of seafood was estimated using the ap-
propriate conversion factors suggested by Co-ordinated research project
MARDOS [34] formulae as the following;
Dose calculations:
DPo−210 ¼ 4:3  10−7  C Po−210  Ir ð2Þ
DPb−210 ¼ 6:9  10−7  C Pb−210  Ir ð3Þ
where DPo−210 and DPb−210 are the CED values for 210Po and 210Pb, respec-
tively (Sv·y−1), CPo−210 and CPb−210 are the radionuclide activity concen-
trations in the edible part of fish Bq·kg−1w·w), and Ir is the ingestion rate
(in kg/year). The biotic has an ingestion rate slightly higher than 4.45 kg
per year (International mean) [35].
3. Results and discussion
The activity concentrations and concentration factors of 210Po & 210Pb
were investigated in the water sample, sediment sample, and marine organ-
isms (fishes and crustaceans) collected from Kasimedu fishing harbour,
Southeast Coast of India is given in the Table 1. The results were discussed
on the basis of dry weight. The results of 210Po & 210Pb concentration in sea-
food and the related dose to population reported by other authors from dif-
ferent regions of the world were shown in the Table 2. The results displayed
an extensive fluctuation in the concentrations of world's sea food industry,
and this fluctuation may be reported due to various factors such as; differ-
ent mode/type of feeding and tissue/organs accumulate different concen-
trations of the selected natural radionuclides.
3.1. Concentration of radionuclide in sea water
The present study concentration of 210Po was found to be 3.6 mBq.L−1
and the concentration of 210Pb was found to be 1.9 mBq L−1 in surface
water samples of Kasimedu fishing harbor.
The 210Po and 210Pb concentrations vary greatly in different locations;
In Palk Strait, results were 1.54 mBq.L−1 for 210Po and 3.15 mBq.L−1 for
M.S. Musthafa et al. Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology 1 (2019) 43–48

Fig. 1. Showing the study area.

45
M.S. Musthafa et al. Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology 1 (2019) 43–48

Table 1
Activity Concentration of 210Po &210Pb, Concentration Ratio (Cr) and Committed Effective Dose of biotic & abiotic components of Kasimedu Fishing Horbour, South East
Coast of India.
210
Activity concentration Po/210Pb activity ratio a
Concentration ratio (Cr) Biota ingestion rate Committed effective dose
Bq·kg−1 kg y−1 (wet weight) μSv·Y-1 (wet weight)
210 210 210 210 210 210
Po Pb Po Pb Po Pb
b
Water 3.6 ± 1.7 1.9 ± 0.3 1.8 – – – – –
Sediment 21.3 ± 1.9 35.7 ± 2.0 0.6 – – – – –

Fishes
Synagris japonicas 34.1 ± 2.3 11.6 ± 0.9 3.1 9.7 × 103 6.1 × 103 4.5 ± 0.5 65.3 ± 0.9 36.0 ± 0.2
Megalapis cordyla 55.6 ± 1.6 17.5 ± 1.3 3.2 15.4 × 103 9.2 × 103 4.5 ± 0.5 106.4 ± 2.9 54.3 ± 1.2
Engraulis indicus 161.5 ± 2.5 53.6 ± 4.2 3.0 4.5 × 104 2.8 × 104 4.4 ± 0.7 309.1 ± 5.3 166.4 ± 3.6
Sciaena aneus 23.6 ± 0.9 7.3 ± 0.5 3.2 6.5 × 103 3.8 × 103 5.1 ± 0.4 45.2 ± 0.5 22.7 ± 0.9

Shrimp
Penaeus indicus 31.5 ± 1.2 13.5 ± 1.3 2.3 8.7 × 103 7.1 × 103 5.0 ± 0.3 60.3 ± 0.5 41.9 ± 0.7
Penaeus monodon 15.7 ± 1.9 10.7 ± 0.9 1.5 4.3 × 103 5.6 × 103 4.5 ± 0.5 30.1 ± 0.2 33.2 ± 0.5

Crab
Scylla serrata 329.7 ± 2.3 92.6 ± 5.2 3.5 9.3 × 105 4.8 × 105 4.6 ± 0.2 630.8 ± 8.5 287.5 ± 3.2

Portunus
sanguinolentus 178.0 ± 1.7 60.9 ± 4.9 2.9 4.9 × 104 3.2 × 104 4.3 ± 0.2 340.6 ± 5.3 189.2 ± 2.3
a
Cr: Concentrationin water/biota.
b
Values are expressed as mBq·L−1.

Table 2
Activity concentrations 210Po and 210Pb in the various seafoods from different regions of the world and its committed effective dose to human beings.
Region Activity concentration Activity concentration Reference
Bq·kg−1 (dry weight) Bq∙kg−1 (dry weight)
210 210 210 210
Po Pb Po Po

Kudankulam coast, India 1.2–248 1.1–14.8 11.04–515.6 3.93–23.5 Khan and Wesley (2011)
Pulicat Lagoon, India 38.3–109.3 0.72–2.7 73.3–209.1 2.2–19.3 Musthafa and Krishnamoorthy [36]
Ennore Creek, India 41.3–113.3 0.7–96.80 79.0–216.8 2.1–297.2 Musthafa and Krishnamoorthy [30]
Aegean Sea, Turkey BDL–249 1.0–35 0.01–10.53 – Çatal et al. [10]
Candarli Gulf, Turkey 332–776 14–40 1992–4232 54–126 Akozcan [7]
Lebanon coast 1.9–140 BDL–98.7 17.2–1110 7.2–450 Aoun et al. [8]
Korean coast 59–392 – 80–534 – Kim et al. [11]
Korean coast 41.3–206 – 21–104 – Cho et al. [9]
Arabian Gulf 0.1–14.7 – 38–85 – Ababneh et al. [14]
Andalusian coast, Spain 40–515 BDL – 73 – – Hurtado-Bermúdez et al. [13]
Kasimedu fishing harbour, Chennai, India 23.6–329 7.3–92.6 30.1–630.8 22.7–287.5 Present work

BDL – Below Detection Limit.

210
Pb [37]. The 210Po & 210Pb values are higher in the marine water of Gulf
of Mannar (34.18 mBq.L−1) due to the presence of minerals such as ilmen-
ite, zircon, rutile, and monazite in the beach sands and sediments, which
progressively enhances natural radionuclides in the surface water [38].
3.2. Concentration of radionuclide in sediments
The activity concentration of 210Po in the sediment sample was
17.9 Bq kg−1 and the activity concentration 210Pb was 28.9 Bq kg−1. The
reported 210Pb values are less when compared to the Gulf of Mannar sedi-
ment (35.3 Bq kg−1) and Kalpakkam beach sediment (385 Bq kg−1) and
higher than the values which are recorded in Kalpakkam beach
(3.2 Bq kg−1) [32].
3.3. Comparison of 210Po and 210Pb concentration in fresh water
The average activity concentration of 210Po and 210Pb in surface water
of Kaveri River ecosystem was 1.2 and 2.7 mBq·L−1. The 210Po and 210Pb
average activity concentration in sediments of Kaveri River ecosystem
was 26.4 and 15.5 Bq kg−1 respectively [39,53]. The 210Po concentration
was recorded as 0.75 mBq·L−1 in the surface water and 3.1 Bq kg−1 in
the sediment samples of Koraiyar River, Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu [40].
Hameed et al. (1997) reported that 210Po concentration of 1.4 mBq·L−1 in
the water and 59.9 Bq kg−1 in the sediments of a pond ecosystem of
Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu (Hameed et al., 1997). The aforementioned re-
ported values are lower than the values recorded in the present study. Clulow
et al. [41] reported that the 210Pb concentration ranged between 14 mBq·L−1
and 208 mBq·L−1 in the water samples of freshwater lakes of Elliot City,
Canada and these values are very high compared to the present study.
3.4. Concentration of radionuclide in fish
The four species of fishes (Synagris japonicas, Megalapsis cordyla,
Engraulis indicus and Sciaena aneus) analyzed for 210Po and 210Pb the con-
centration ranged from 23.6 to 161.5 Bq kg−1 and from 7.3 to
53.6 Bq kg−1, respectively. Among the fishes, Engraulius indicus displayed
a high activity of 210Po (161.5 Bq kg−1) than the others. The accumulation
of 210Pb was, significantly lower than that of 210Po in all the fish species ex-
amined. It was observed that Engraulis indicus was found to have 210Pb in
higher concentration (53.6 Bq kg−1) than the others. The recorded values
were higher than the values reported by (Hameed et al., 1997) [39,40].
In another study, concentration of 210Po and 210Pb in the fishes
S. fimbriata and T. mossambica ranged from 41.3 to 81.6 Bq kg−1 and 0.7
to 2.0 Bq kg−1 respectively in Ennore Creek environment [30].

46
M.S. Musthafa et al.
3.5. Concentration of radionuclide in crustacean species
The concentration of 210Po and 210Pb in the crustacean shrimp species
Fenneropenaeus indicus was ranged between 15.7 and 31.5 Bq kg−1 and
the concentration of 210Po and 210Pb in Fenneropenaeus monodon was 10.7
and 13.5 Bq kg−1. Hameed et al. (1997) reported that crustacean muscle re-
corded a high level of 210Po (41.3–89.4 Bq kg−1) and exoskeleton recorded
a high level of 210Pb (40.2–51.6 Bq kg−1). A 210Po concentration
43.9 Bq kg−1 was recorded in the crab Barytelphusa jaguemonti of Koraiyar
River [40]. The concentration of 210Po and 210Pb in the crustacean shrimp
Fenneropenaeus indicus ranged between 42.4 and 61.3 Bq kg−1 and the con-
centration of 210Po and 210Pb in Fenneropenaeus monodon ranged between
0.7 and 1.4 Bq kg−1 in the Ennore Creek environment [30]. It is suggested
that the presence of organic moiety such as chitin is responsible for the
higher level of 210Po in crustaceans. Cherry and Heyraud [42] stated that
210
Po has a higher binding affinity for organic moiety and possible account-
ing for high activity of 210Po in the exoskeleton of crustacean [42].
In the present study, the crustacean crab species Scylla serrata and
Portunus sanguinolentus accumulated the higher concentrations
(329.7 Bq·kg−1 and 92.6 Bq·kg−1 and 178.0 Bq·kg−1 and 60.9 Bq·kg−1)
of 210Po and 210Pb respectively. Perhaps the higher concentration of
210
Po and 210Pb observed in crabs due to their benthic mode of life and
detritivorous nutrition, reason is enormous accumulation of the substances.
210
Po concentration of 88.7 Bq·kg−1 was recorded in the soft tissue of snail
Pila virens and 38.2 Bq·kg−1 in the soft tissue of Bellamya dissimilis from the
Koraiyar River [40]. Lamellidens marginalis accumulated the highest con-
centration (57.4–105.7 Bq kg−1) of 210Po in the River ecosystem of Kaveri,
Tiruchirappalli, India [39]. On the other hand the activity concentration of
210
Po noticed 53.3 Bq kg−1 and 36.4 Bq kg−1 and the concentration of
210
Pb recorded 0.68–0.92 Bq kg−1 and 0.18–0.42 Bq kg−1 in Lamellidens
marginalis and P.virens respectively in the freshwater pond ecosystem of
Tiruchirappalli, India [43]. It is well known that benthic fauna show unique
characteristic feature of accumulating radionuclide in their internal com-
partments by tens of thousand times than those in water through various
physiological process [44]. Among the benthic organisms, molluscs in gen-
eral and mussels and oysters in particular, have been identified as sentinel
organism. The soft tissue of the bivalve mollusk Meretrix casta in the estuar-
ies concentrated higher level of 210Po than the soft tissues of gastropods.
The selected gastropods feed chiefly on vegetation whereas bivalves feed
on organic particulate which are enriched with 210Po. Based on the accu-
mulation pattern of 210Po in various invertebrates Skwarzec and Falkowski
[17] concluded that accumulation is higher in mussels.
3.6. 210Po/210Pb activity ratio
The 210Po/210Pb activity ratio is a sensitive bio-indicator. The
210
Po/210Pb activity ratio ranges between 3.0 and 3.2 in fish species,
whereas, it was between 1.5 and 2.3 in shrimps and 2.9 to 3.5 was calcu-
lated in the crab species. The highest activity ratio was noted in the crab
Scylla serata, the higher ratio explains that the unsupported 210Po exists
mainly from accumulation, not by decay of 210Pb. According to Shannon
et al. [45], the majority of the 210Po accumulated by organisms through
“unsupported”, indicating that 210Po is selectively accumulated relative to
its precursor [45]. A similar finding has been reported by many researchers,
indicating that the larger part of 210Po in each species comes from the envi-
ronment rather than by ingrowth [46–48].
3.7. Concentration ratio (Cr)
The concentration ratio was calculated by measuring activity of Po &
210
210
Pb in fishes, prawns and mussels. It can be defined as the ratio of the ac-
tivity in the edible tissues of an organism in Bq kg−1 to the activity of fil-
tered water in Bq L−1. The average activities of 210Po & 210Pb in
Kasimedu fishing harbour water were 3.6 and 1.9 mBq L−1 respectively.
The Cr for fishes ranged from 6.5 × 103 to 4.5 × 104, whereas the Cr for
the crustaceans ranged between 4.3 × 103 and 9.3 × 105. Among the
47
Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology 1 (2019) 43–48
various species, the lower value of 4.3 × 103 has been observed in the
shrimp Fenneropenaeus monodon and higher value 9.3 × 105 was noted in
the crab Scylla serrata. The 210Po Cr derived from the biotic was found to
be higher compared to the reference value of 3.6 × 101 [54].
3.8. Committed effective dose
The annual committed dose of 210Po acquired by the common popula-
tion via intake of food components is vital when compared to the variation
in the bio-accumulation of 210Po [16]. The committed effective dose was
found to be 30.1–630.8 μSv/year for 210Po and 22.7–287.5 μSv/year for
210
Pb. The 210Po dose is expected via the consumption of fish Sardinella
longicepes (552.1 μSv/year) in Athangarai estuary and Thryssama labarica
(406.9 μSv/year) in Punnaikayal estuary [49]. The Committed effective
dose of the present study are higher to the public from 210Po when com-
pared to the consumption of seafood from Bombay Harbour (2.1–40.0
μSv/year) and the Kalpakkam environment (36.3 μSv/year) ([50,51]. The
committed effective dose was reported between 79.0 and 216.8 μSv/year
for 210Po and and 2.1–297.2 μSv/year for 210Pb, in the Ennore Creek envi-
ronment [30]. The annual committed dose from 210Po and 210Pb estimated
in the present study is remarkably lesser than the findings reported for sea-
food in Candarli Gulf of Turkey (210Po – 1992 to 4232 μSv) [7] and in
Lebanon (210Po -17.2–1110 μSv and 210Pb – 7.2–450 μSv) [8]. Whereas,
the dose is comparable to those found in the Republic of Korea, the con-
sumption dose of seafood ranged (80–534 μSv) [11] Table 2. The present
study indicates that the dose transfer to the inhabitants of town around
Kasimedu fishing harbour, South East Coast of India through 210Po intake,
was higher when compared to those in Bombay coast [50] and Kalpakkam
coast [51].
4. Conclusion
210
Po and 210Pb has been determined in water, sediment, and biotic
(fishes, crustaceans and bivalves) collected from Kasimedu fishing harbour,
Southeast Coast of India. The higher concentrations were found in the edi-
ble tissues of Scylla serrata than in other biotic due to its benthic mode of
feeding pattern and suggesting that they could serve as bioindicator of ra-
dionuclides in the Kasimedu fishing harbour. The radionuclides accumu-
lated by these organisms lead to a higher internal dose rate. The findings
of the present study indicates that the dose transfer are higher to the inhab-
itants of town around Kasimedu fishing harbour, South East Coast of India
through 210Po intake, compared to those in Kalpakkam coast and Bombay
coast. It is confirmed that, activity concentration in marine biotic and
doses to population was dominated by naturally occurring alpha-emitter
210
Po than the man-made radionuclides [29]. This systematic baseline
data infers that, the committed effective dose rate to inhabitants around
Kasimedu fishing harbour was high due to consumption of marine biotic
through 210Po than the other radionuclies and it also serves as biomonitor-
ing tool for the effects of natural radioactivity and dose transfer to public
through the consumption of aquatic biotic. Moreover, in future this data
will be useful in determining if these continuous increments of activity con-
centrations of natural radionuclides could be responsible for decline in fe-
cundity and hatching rate which leads to depletion of aquatic species in
the region.
Acknowledgements
Authors are thankful to Chairman, Hon. Secretary & Correspondent,
Principal and Dr. M. Asrar Sheriff, Head, P.G. & Research Department of Zo-
ology, The New College, Chennai for institutional support.
Reference
[1] IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), Quantification of radionuclide transfers in
terrestrial and freshwater environments for radiological Assessments, IAEA-TECDOC-
1616, IAEA, Vienna, 2009.
M.S. Musthafa et al.
[2] Yankovich, T.L., Cornett, R.J.J., 2004. “Temporal changes in radionuclide transfer to bi-
otic in Canadian Shield lakes receiving chronic inputs: Reconstruction of radionuclide
exposure to non-human biotic in perch lake over a 40 year period”, in Proc. ECORAD
Conf., Aix-en-Provence.
[3] T.L. Yankovich, et al., Preliminary screening of aquatic macrophytes as biomonitors in
environmental risk assessment of nuclear facilities: an ecosystem approach, Environ-
mental Protection Approaches for Nuclear Facilities (Proc. 2nd Int.Symp. Ionizing Radi-
ation, Ottawa), vol. 1999, Atomic Energy Control Board/CanadianNuclear Safety
Commission, Ottawa 2001, p. 2001.
[4] T.M. Beasely, H.E. Palmer, Lead-210 and polonium-210 in biological samples from
Alaska, Science 152 (1966) 1062–1063.
[5] R.V. Osborne, Lead-210 and polonium-210 in natural water, Science 134 (1963)
98–99.
[6] W.R. Schell, T. Jodela, R. Eagle, Natural Pb-210 in the Marine Environment. Proceed-
ings of International Symposium on Radioactive Contamination of the Marine Environ-
ment, Seattle, IAEA, Vienna, 1973 701–723.
[7] S. Akozcan, Levels of 210Po and 210Pb in mussel and sediments in Candarli gulf and
the related dose assessment to the coastal population, Mar. Pollut. Bull. 73 (2013)
11–15.
[8] M. Aoun, O. El Samad, R. BouKhozam, R. Lobinski, 210Po andAssessment of committed
effective dose due to the ingestion of 210Pb in consumed Lebanese fish affected by a
phosphate fertilizer plant, J. Environ. Radioact. 140 (2015) 25–29.
[9] Boeun Cho, Gi-Hoon Hong, Suk Hyun Kim, Hyunmi Lee, Annual effective dose of 210Po
from sea food origin (oysters and mussels) in Korea, Journal of Radiation Protection and
Research 41 (3) (2016) 245–252, https://doi.org/10.14407/jrpr.2016.41.3.245.
[10] Ebru Mat Çatal, Aysun Ug ˘ur, Banu Özden, Isık Filizok, 210Po and 210Pb variations in
fish species from the Aegean Sea and the contribution of 210Po to the radiation dose,
Marine Pollution Bulletin 64 (2012) 801–806.
[11] S.H. Kim, G.H. Hong, H.M. Lee, B.E. Cho, 210Po in the marine biotic of Korean coastal
waters and the effective dose from seafood consumption, J. Environ. Radioact. (2016)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvrad.2016.11.001.
[12] Saif Uddin, MontahaBehbehani, Abdulnabi Al-Ghadban, SufiyaSajid, W. Al-Zekri,
Mohammad Ali, Sarah Al-Jutaili, Lamya Al-Musallam, Vanitha Vinod, Mohammad Al-
Murad, FaizAlam, 2018. 210Po concentration in selected calanoid copepods in the
northern Arabian gulf. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 133, 861–864.
[13] Santiago Hurtado-Bermúdez, José Antonio Jurado-González, Juan Luis Santos, Carlos
Francisco Díaz-Amigo, Irene Aparicio, José Luis Mas, Esteban Alonso, Baseline activity
concentration of 210Pb and 210Po and dose assessment in bivalve molluscs at the Anda-
lusian coast, Mar. Pollut. Bull. 133 (2018) 711–716.
[14] Zaid Q. Ababneh, Anas M. Ababneh, Fahad I. Almasoud, Sultan Alsagabi, Yousef J.
Alanazi, Ahmad A. Aljulaymi, Khaled M. Aljarrah, Assessment of the committed effec-
tive dose due to the 210Po intake from fish consumption for the Arabian Gulf popula-
tion, Chemosphere 210 (2018) 511–515.
[15] R.D. Cherry, L.V. Shannon, The alpha radioactivity of marine organisms, Atomic Energy
Review 12 (1974) 45.
[16] R.B. Holtzman, Natural levels of 210Pb, 210Po and 226Ra in humans and biotic of the
Arctic, Nature 210 (1996) 1094–1097.
[17] B. Skwarzec, L. Falkowski, Accumulation of 210Po in Baltic invertebrates, J. Environ.
Radioact. 8 (1988) 99–109.
[18] R.D. Cherry, M. Heyraud, R. Rindfuss, Po-210 in teleost fish and in marine mammals:
interfamily differences and possible association between polonium-210 and red muscle
content, J. Environ. Radioact. 32 (1994) 91–96.
[19] P. McDonald, M.S. Baxter, S.W. Fowler, Distribution of radionuclides in molluscs,
winkles and prawns. Part 1. Study of organisms under environmental conditions
using conventional radio-analytical techniques, J. Environ. Radioact. 18 (1993)
181–202.
[20] J. Harrison, R. Leggett, D. Lloyd, A. Phipps, B. Scott, 210Po as a poison, J. Radiol. Prot.
27 (2007) 17–40.
[21] Jefferson, R.D., Goans, R.E., Blain, P.G., Thomas, S.H., 2009. Diagnosis and treatment of
polonium poisoning. Clininal Toxicology (Phila) 47, 379–92 and Erratum in: Clinical
Toxicolology (Phila) 47, 608.
[22] R.B. McFee, J.B. Leikin, Death by 210Po: lessons learned from the murder of f ormer so-
viet spy Alexander Litvinenko, Semin. Diagn. Pathol. 26 (2009) 61–67.
[23] B. Swift, Dating human skeletal remains: investigating the viability of measuring the
equilibrium between 210Po and 210Pb as a means of estimating the post-mortem inter-
val, Forensic Sci. Int. 98 (1998) 119–126.
[24] D.N. Yadav, M.M. Sarin, Ra-Po-Pb isotope systematics in waters of Sambhar salt Lake,
Rajasthan (India): geochemical characterization and particulate reactivity, J. Environ.
Radioact. 100 (2009) 17–22.
[25] F.P. Carvalho, S.W. Fowler, An experimental study on bioaccumulation and turnover of
210Po and 210Pb in marine shrimp, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 102 (1993) 125–133.
[26] A. Aarkrog, M.S. Baxter, A.O. Bettencourt, R. Bojanowski, A. Bologga, S. Charmasson,
Comparison of doses from 137Cs and 210Po in marine food: a major international
study, J. Environ. Radioact. 34 (1997) 69–90.
[27] R.D. Cherry, M. Heyraud, J.J.W. Higgo, Polonium-210: its relative enrichment in the he-
patopancreas of marine invertebrates, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 13 (1983) 229–236.
48
View publication stats
Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology 1 (2019) 43–48
[28] P. Stepnowski, B. Skwarzec, Comparison of 210Po accumulation in bivalves from south-
ern Baltic, coast of Spitsbergen and Sasek Wielki Lake in Poland, J. Environ. Radioact.
49 (2) (2000) 201–208.
[29] Nicholas S. Fisher, Thomas G. Hinton KarineBeaugelin-Seiller, Zofia Baumann, Daniel J.
Madigan, Jacqueline Garnier-Laplace, Evaluation of radiation doses and associated risk
from the Fukushima nuclear accident to marine biotic and human consumers of sea-
food, PNAS, no. 110 (26) (2013) 10670–10675.
[30] Saiyad Musthafa, M. and Krishnamoorthy, R. 2012. Estimation of 210Po, 210Po and its
Dose to Human beings due to consumption of marine species of Ennore Creek, South
India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 184, No. (7): 6253–6260.
[31] W.W. Flynn, The determination of low levels of 210Po in environmental materials,
Anal. Chim. Acta 43 (1968) 221–227.
[32] M.A.R. Iyengar, M.P. Rajan, S. Ganapathy, P.R. Kamath, Sources of natural radiation ex-
posure in a low monazite environment. Natural radiation environment III, Vol 2, proc.
Int. Symp., Houston, Texas, Conf. 780422 (1980) 1090–1106.
[33] Kamath, P. R., Bhat, I. S., Kamala R., Iyengar, M. A. R., Koshy, E., Waingankar, U. S.,
et al. 1964. Recent radiochemical procedures for bioassay studies at Trombay. In: Pro-
ceedings of the Symposium on Assessment of Radioactivity in Man. IAEA, Heidelberg,
Vienna, pp. 195–215.
[34] IAEA. Sources of radioactivity in the marine environment and their relative contribu-
tions to overall dose assessment from marine radioactivity (MARDOS), IAEA. Vienna,
Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency; 1995; TECDOC-383.
[35] FAO. 1999. Report of the FAO Technical Working Group on the conservation and man-
agement of sharks. Tokyo, Japan, April 23–27 1998. FAO Fisheries Report. No. 583.
Rome:FAO; 28p.
[36] Saiyad Musthafa, M. and Krishnamoorthy R., 2011. Assessment of committed effective
dose to human beings due to consumption of fishes collected from Pulicat lagoon, South
East of India. Radiation Protection and Environment, Vol. 34/Number 2/April–June
2011: 110–113.
[37] A.S. Bukhari, M.M. Shahul Hameed, T. Ravimanickam, S. Hameed, Radiation ecology of
Palk Strait, Bulletin of Radiation Protection 26 (1& 2) (2003) 473–477.
[38] S.S.N. Somasundaram, Studies on the distribution and bioaccumulation of natural ra-
dionuclides in the ecosystem of gulf of Mannar, India. Ph.D, Thesis, Bharathidasan Uni-
versity, Tiruchirappalli, 1998.
[39] Shaheed, K., Somasundram, S. S. N. Shahul Hameed, P. &Iyengar, M. A. R. 1997. Study
of 210Po distribution aspects in the riverine ecosystem of Kaveri, Tiruchirappalli, India.
J. Environmental Pollution Vol.95, 3; pp 371–377.
[40] R. Krishnamoorthy, H.E. Syed Mohamed, A. Sadiq Bukhari, M.M. Shahul Hameed, P.
Shahul Hameed, Radioecological studies in Koraiyar River ecosystem, Tiruchirappalli,
J. Ecotoxicol.Environ.Monit. 18 (6) (2008) 573–580.
[41] F.V. Clulow, N.K. Dave, T.P. Lim, R. Avadhanula, Radionuclides (210Pb, 210Po, 230Th
and 232Th) and thorium & uranium in water, sediments and fish from lakes near the
city of Elliot Lake, Ontario, Canada. Journal of, Environ. Pollut. 99 (1998) 199–213.
[42] R.D. Cherry, M. Heyraud, 210Po content of marine shrimp: variation with biological
and environmental factors, Mar. Biol. 65 (1981) 167–175.
[43] P. Shahul Hameed, K. Shaheed, S.S.N. Somasundram, A study on distribution of natural
radionuclide 210Po in a pond ecosystem, J. Biosci. 22 (5) (1997) 627–634.
[44] Bernhard, M & A. Zattera, 1974. Major pollutants in the marine environment. Proceed-
ings of the second international congress on marine pollution and marine waste dis-
posal, San Remo, p. 195 – 3000.
[45] L.V. Shannon, R.D. Cherry, K.J. Orren, Polonium and lead in the marine environment,
Geochimica et CosmochimicaActa 34 (1970) 701–711.
[46] S.A. Bukhari, Studies on the bioaccumulation of natural radionuclides in the seafood or-
ganisms and dose transfer to the coastal population of Palk Strait, southeast coast of
India. Ph.D, Thesis, Bharadhidasan University, Tiruchirapalli, 2004.
[47] F.P. Carvalho, S.W. Fowler, A double-tracer technique to determine the relative impor-
tance of water and food as sources of polonium-210 to marine prawns and fish, Mar.
Ecol. Prog. Ser. 103 (1994) 251–264.
[48] P. Germain, G. Leclerc, S. Simon, Transfer of 210Po into Mytilusedulis and Fucus
vesiculosus from Baie de seine, Sci. Total Environ. 164 (1995) 109–123.
[49] Krishnamoorthy, R., Ravikumar, S. &Shahul Hameed, P. 2006. A comparative study on
the internal dose due to 210Po in the ecosystem of Athangarai estuary (Palk Strait) and
Punnaikayal estuary (Gulf of Mannar), India. Bulletin of Radiation Protection, 29 (1&4),
13–15.
[50] V.S. Bangera, &Rudran, K. internal radiation dose to the public from 210Po due to con-
sumption of seafood from Bombay harbour bay, Bulletin of Radiation Protection 18 (1
and 2) (1995) 192–197.
[51] M.P. Rajan, V. Kannan, S. Ganapathy, &Iyengar, M. A. R, Natural radioactivity intake
through dietary sources at Kalpakkam. Bulletin of Radiation Protection 3 (4) (1980) 69–74.
[52] M. Feroz Khan, S. Godwin Wesley, Assessment of health safety from ingestion of natural
radionuclides in seafoods from a tropical coast, India, Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62 (2) (2011)
399–404.
[53] P. Shahul Hameed, K. Shaheed, S.S.N. Somasundaram, A study on distribution of natu-
ral radionuclide polonium-210 in a pond ecosystem, J. Biosci. 22 (5) (1997) 627–634.
[54] IAEA, Handbook of parameter values for the prediction of radionuclide transfer in ter-
restrial and freshwater environments, Tech. Rep. Series (472) (2010) 679.