Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105
DOI 10.1007/s12665-016-5902-0
THEMATIC ISSUE
Assessment of heavy metal contamination in water body
and riverbed sediments of the Yanghe River in the Bohai Sea,
China
Cuiping Kuang1 • Yunchi Shan2 • Jie Gu3 • Haibing Shao4 • Wanlei Zhang5
Yongfeng Zhang5 • Jiabo Zhang6 • Huixin Liu6
Received: 5 February 2016 / Accepted: 18 July 2016 / Published online: 25 July 2016
Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016
Abstract Several famous beach bathing places and aqui-
culture areas locate in the Yanghe River coast of the Bohai
Sea, which are very sensitive to the quality of water and
sediment from river discharges. To assess heavy metal
contamination, heavy metal in water body and riverbed
sediments was investigated in the flood and dry seasons in
2013 at 8 sites along the Yanghe River. All heavy metal
concentrations in water body were very low and less than
the threshold value of drinking water quality standard of
China. There was no significant correlation between heavy
metal pollution in water body and riverbed sediments.
Sediment pollution was assessed by five approaches
including pollution load index (PLI), geo-accumulation
index (Igeo), potential ecological risk index (RI), cluster
This article is part of a Topical Collection in Environmental Earth
Sciences on ‘‘Environment and Health in China II’’ guest edited by
Tian-Xiang Yue, Cui Chen, Bing Xu and Olaf Kolditz.
& Cuiping Kuang
cpkuang@tongji.edu.cn
& Jie Gu
jgu@shou.edu.cn
1
College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University,
Shanghai 200092, China
2
East China Electric Power Design Institute Co., LTD,
Shanghai 200063, China
3
College of Marine Sciences, Shanghai Ocean University,
Shanghai 201306, China
4
Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ),
Permoserstr. 15, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
5
Marine Environmental Monitoring Center of Hebei Province,
Qinhuangdao 066002, China
6
Qinhuangdao Mineral Resource and Hydrogeological
Brigade, Qinhuangdao, Hebei, China
•
analysis (CA) and principal component analysis (PCA). The
results of heavy metal contamination in riverbed sediments
showed that: (1) the mean PLI in the range of 1.0–1.1
indicated a progressive deterioration, and the Igeo revealed
the pollution in the order of Cd [ Cu [ Zn [ Pb [ Cr; (2)
the RI presented that the pollution in the downstream was
much higher than that in the upstream; (3) the contamina-
tion decreased in the upstream due to decreased domestic
wastewater where far from the development zone Funing
Town, while it increased in the downstream because of
dense population and tourists in the coastal zone; and (4) the
PCA and FA demonstrate that domestic sewage was a major
source of heavy metal contamination.
Keywords Heavy metal  Pollution indices  Riverbed
sediments  Contamination assessment  The Yanghe River
Introduction
With the rapid growth of population, urbanization and
industrialization, various contaminants enter the surface
water system (Onodera et al. 2008). Rivers, therefore, have
been subjected to increasing stress as the end point of the
wastewater from the adjacent area (Phiri et al. 2005). In
aquatic system, heavy metal contamination has received
considerable concern due to its toxicity, abundance, per-
sistence and bio-accumulation (Sin et al. 2001; Barlas et al.
2005). Heavy metal enters into rivers through atmospheric
deposition, sewage, urban wastewater and agricultural and
industrial runoff (Cheng et al. 2013). While transported by
the river stream, heavy metal can easily be absorbed by
sediments and deposit on the riverbed, so they are dis-
tributed between the aqueous phase and sediments (Sin
et al. 2001). In the estuarine, a large quantity of heavy metal
123
1105 Page 2 of 13
contamination can be found inside the sediments and only a
small portion stays dissolved in water (Gaur et al. 2005).
Heavy metal may accumulate in human bodies and
result in health problems (Cook et al. 1990). Heavy metal
also poses threat to the coastal and marine environment
when riverine flow and sediments discharged into sea. Due
to the water discharge fluctuations and low residence time
of sediments in the water, only measuring the pollutants in
the water body is not conclusive (Varol 2011), and heavy
metal concentrations in the riverbed sediments must also be
considered for assessment quality of whole river system.
Sediments act as the main carriers of heavy metal and the
potential secondary sources of pollution in the river system
(Segura et al. 2006). Under changing physical and chemi-
cal conditions, heavy metal in the bed sediments may
reenter the water column via sediment resuspension or
desorption (Dong et al. 2012). And heavy metal concen-
trations in sediments change spatially and temporally,
which are very important in clarifying the pollution history
(Morillo et al. 2004). So the analysis of heavy metal in
riverbed sediments is essential to study heavy metal pol-
lution and assessment river system quality. Heavy metal
interacts with many surrounding environmental factors;
especially in estuaries due to tidal current and saline water
intrusion, many physical and chemical processes are dif-
ferent from those in the river environment with freshwater
moving in one direction (Ip et al. 2007). Investigation on
heavy metal from either natural or anthropogenic sources is
beneficial to comprehensively evaluate their impacts on the
ecosystem.
The City of Qinhuangdao, located in the northeast of
Hebei Province, is an important coastal city in the north of
China. Several rivers flow through the city and finally
discharge into the Bohai Sea. The Yanghe River, with a
total length of about 100 km and a catchment area of about
1100 km2 (Hebei Province Department of Land and
Resources 2007), is the longest among all local rivers in
Qinhuangdao. With the rapid population growth and
industrial development, the river water quality deteriorated,
and the Yanghe River was one of the major pollution-
emitting outlets in Hebei Province (Liu et al. 2011a).
Several coastal beach bathing places and aquiculture areas
located near the Yanghe River estuary, heavy metal pol-
lution in the river raised concerns among the public, and
the potential risk to coastal and marine environment needs
to be investigated (Kuang et al. 2010; Liu et al. 2011b).
The objectives of this study are (i) to evaluate the level
of heavy metal contamination in water body and riverbed
sediments of the Yanghe River, (ii) to present the spatial
and temporal distribution of heavy metals in the river and
(iii) to identify natural and anthropogenic sources of heavy
metal contamination in study area.
123
Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105
Methodology
Study area
The Yanghe River, with a drainage basin of approximately
1100 km2, is the longest river (100 km) in Qinhuangdao
(Hebei Province Department of Land and Resources 2007).
In the upper stream, there are two main tributaries named
the East Yanghe River and the West Yanghe River that
merge into the Yanghe Reservoir (see Fig. 1). The East
Yanghe River origins the Qinglong County and has a
catchment area 306 km2 surrounded by mountainous areas
that result in main pollutants into the river from water loss
and soil erosion due to heavy rain in the flood season. In
recent years, the East Yanghe River is almost dry in most
of times except for the flood season. The West Yanghe
River originates from the Lulong County with a catchment
area 343 km2, where is densely population area and is rich
in sweet potato that leads to a lot of starch processing
plants. Large pollution from domestic sewage and indus-
trial wastewater is discharged into the West Yanghe River
and finally into the Yanghe Reservoir.
The Yanghe Reservoir locates in Funing County, which
was built and put into use in 1961. The reservoir has a
drainage basin of 755 km2, i.e., 68.6 % of whole Yanghe
basin area. The reservoir design standard is a one in
100-year flood with a corresponding design flood level at
62.4 m and reservoir storage volume of 2.75 9 108 m3. The
reservoir check standard is a one in 1000-year flood with a
corresponding design flood level at 65.32 m and reservoir
storage volume of 3.53 9 108 m3. The normal storage water
level is 57 m, and the reservoir storage volume is
1.47 9 108 m3. The design discharge capacity of reservoir
flood discharging tunnel is 206 m3/s with a maximum value
of 500 m3/s. The main function of the reservoir is for urban
water supply, and other functions are flood control, irriga-
tion and generating electricity (Li et al. 2010; Shao et al.
1999; Zhang et al. 2010). Generally, water quality in the
reservoir is good with most of water quality index less than
grade II standard value, such as chemical oxygen demand
(COD) with a value in the range of 2.1–4.9 mg/L (Wang
and Zheng 2013; Zhang et al. 2010), which is much better
than water quality at the reservoir downstream. The con-
centrations of heavy metal Cu and Cr in the surface sedi-
ment of the reservoir were 26.1–44.1 and 42.7–56.8 mg/kg,
respectively (Cai et al. 2007).
We focus our study on the lower river course of the
Yanghe Reservoir, i.e., from the reservoir outlet in the west
to the river mouth in the east, with a length of about 40 km,
as shown in Fig. 1. The study area locates in an extrat-
ropical monsoon climatic region, the annual mean tem-
perature is about 10 °C, and rainfall is 750 mm, varying
Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105
Study area
Fig. 1 Location of the study area
temporally in summer and winter (Cui and Li 2006). The
multi-year averaged runoff of the Yanghe River is
2.48 9 108 m3, and the Yanghe Reservoir inflow is
1.84 9 108 m3. Normally, the runoff in July to September
is about 73.5 % of annual runoff. A large number of vil-
lages and towns are built on both sides of the river,
including the Funing Town, the center of the Funing
County. The river receives domestic raw sewage water,
agricultural runoff and also industrial wastewater from the
surrounding areas, which have caused the deterioration of
the river ecosystem. Due to the fact that water quality in the
Yanghe Reservoir is much better than that in the reservoir
downstream, flood discharge from the reservoir in the flood
season can improve water quality of the reservoir down-
stream (Hu 2016).
The Yanghe River flows into the Bohai Sea to be affected
by tides. The tidal movement in Bohai Sea experiences a
tidal wave system of the North Yellow Sea entering from
Bohai Strait. The tidal waves in Bohai Sea can be divided
into two separate tidal wave systems: the north branch and
the west branch. The north branch moves northward,
passing Liaodong Bay and presenting a clockwise rotation
with Qinhuangdao as its center, while the west branch
moves westward, passing Bohai Bay and exhibiting a
counterclockwise rotation with the mouth of the Yellow
River as its center (Pan et al. 2014). The mouth of the
Yanghe River is located between the two branches near the
amphidromic point, experiencing a regular diurnal tide with
a low tidal range of 0.74 m and low tidal flow velocities less
than 0.2 m/s in SW-NE directions in the coastal water.
Page 3 of 13 1105
Sample collection
The water and riverbed sediment samples were collected in
August (i.e., the flood season) and November (i.e., the dry
season) of 2013. Figure 1 shows the locations of eight
sampling, namely S1–S8 along the river from the upstream
to the river mouth. S1 in the upstream is seated in the
northwest of Funing Town, which is about 10 km down
from the Yanghe Reservoir. S4 and S5 are situated the area
near some traffic arteries such as railways, the national
road and the coastal highway. S8 in the river downstream is
near the river mouth. The distance between adjacent sites is
3–4 km. Salinity, pH and suspended solids (SS) were
measured on sites by using salinometer, pH meter and
portable turbidimeter, respectively. Unfiltered water sam-
ples were collected from flowing water body at the center
of the river at 8 sites and kept in acid-cleaned polypropy-
lene bottles for the analysis of heavy metal and chemical
oxygen demand (COD). The top 20 cm riverbed sediments
were taken by using a clamshell-type sampler at the same
locations and were sealed in pre-cleaned polyethylene
bags. All samples were then placed in a cooler and trans-
ported to the laboratory immediately for further analysis.
Chemical analysis
First, sediment samples were air-dried. Pebbles and plant
fragments were removed. Then, they were digested with
the automatic digestion apparatus (AtuoDigiBlock S60)
and stored in acid-rinsed polyethylene bottles. Polarization
123
1105 Page 4 of 13
spectrometer for heavy metal was applied for the mea-
surement of Cu, Zn, Pb and Cd. In addition, the concen-
tration of Cr was analyzed using a flame atomic absorption
spectrophotometer (FAAS). COD was measured with the
basic potassium permanganate method. All analytical steps
were under strict quality control according to the standard
procedure (State Environment Protection Agency 2004;
The Yangtze Water Environment Monitoring Center 2013).
Deionized water was used throughout the experiments. The
glassware was washed with dilute acid followed by several
portions to distilled water.
Paralleled examination was used in the chemical anal-
ysis, all experiments were carried out in triplicate, and the
measured concentrations were within a ±3 % error limit.
The original data used in the study were the mean value of
paralleled examinations.
Assessment of contamination
Approaches such as the Pearson correlation coefficients,
enrichment factor (EF), contamination factor (CF), pollution
load index (PLI), geo-accumulation index (Igeo) and poten-
tial ecological risk index (RI) have already been successfully
applied to assess the impact of heavy metal in sediments (Qi
et al. 2010; Varol 2011; Hou et al. 2013). Furthermore, to
obtain meaningful results in complex data sets, multivariate
chemometric techniques are adopted. Principal component
analysis (PCA), factor analysis (FA) and cluster analysis
(CA) have also become good approaches in environmental
study, especially for heavy metal analysis (Fu et al. 2014;
Yuan et al. 2014). On the interpretation of geochemical data,
the choice of background values plays an important role. The
average shale values or the average crustal abundance data
were often used as reference baselines (Loska and Wiechula
2003; Pekey 2006; Yuan et al. 2014). However, the average
shale value in China is different with other countries, the
national background shale value usually adopted (Chen and
Liu 1992; Liu et al. 2009), which is also adopted in this
study. Several different methods (as described below) were
used to assess the heavy metal pollution level in water body
and riverbed sediments to better understand the quality of
the Yanghe River.
Pearson correlation coefficients
The Pearson correlation coefficient is a measure of asso-
ciation between two random variables. It explores the lin-
ear relationship between two quantities X and Y, each with
n individuals:
X n
Xi  X Yi  Y
rXY ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Pn ffi  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Pn
2 2
i¼1 ðXi  XÞ i¼1 ðYi  YÞ
i¼1
123
Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105
P
where X ¼ 1n ni¼1 Xi is the mean of X and Y is the mean of
Y. The correlation coefficient rXY ranges from -1 to 1. A
correlation coefficient close to 1 indicates a positive rela-
tionship between X and Y, while a correlation coefficient close
to -1 indicates a negative relationship. A correlation close to
0 indicates the absence of relationship between X and Y.
Contamination factor (CF) of Heavy Metal and Pollution
Load Index (PLI)
The CF is the ratio obtained by dividing the concentration
of each metal in the sediment samples by background
value:
Cheavy metal
CF ¼ ð2Þ
Cbackground
CF values were interpreted and suggested by Hakanson
(1980), where CF \ 1 means low contamination;
1 \ CF \ 3 indicates moderate contamination;
3 \ CF \ 6 is considerable contamination; and CF [ 6
suggests very high contamination.
The PLI is defined as the nth root of the multiplications
of the concentrations (CFmetals) (Suresh et al. 2011):
PLI ¼ ðCF1  CF2  CF3      CFn Þ1=n ð3Þ
where CF is the contamination factor and n is the number
of metal species. The PLI gives an assessment of the
overall toxicity status for each sample, and it also shows
the contribution of each metal to the pollution. PLI value of
one is a threshold, i.e., if PLI \ 1, there is no heavy metal
pollution; otherwise, when PLI [ 1, it means that a pol-
lution exists (Varol 2011), which indicates progressive
deterioration of sediment quality.
Geo-accumulation index (Igeo)
Geo-accumulation index has been used since 1960s (Müller
1969). It is defined by the following equation:
 
Cn
Igeo ¼ Log2 ð4Þ
1:5Bn
where Cn is the concentration of metal examined in sedi-
ment samples and Bn is the geochemical background con-
centration of the metal (n). The factor 1.5 is the background
matrix correction factor due to lithospheric effects. The
geo-accumulation index consists of seven grades as shown
in Table 1.
Potential ecological risk index (RI)
ð1Þ The RI was first introduced by Hakanson (1980), and its
value can be calculated by the following formulas:
Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105 Page 5 of 13 1105

Table 1 Indices and grades of geo-accumulation index

Class 0 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6

Igeo Igeo \ 0 0 B Igeo \ 1 1 B Igeo \ 2 2 B Igeo \ 3 3 B Igeo \ 4 4 B Igeo \ 5 Igeo C 5

Pollution Practically Unpolluted to Moderately Moderately to Heavily Heavily to Extremely
Grade unpolluted moderately polluted polluted heavily polluted polluted extremely polluted
polluted

Cfi ¼ CDi =CRi ð5Þ independent variables. It extracts the eigenvalues and
eigenvectors from the covariance matrix of original vari-
Eri ¼ Tri  Cfi ð6Þ ables and summarizes the statistical correlation among
X
m constituents in water with a minimum loss of original
RI ¼ Eri ð7Þ information (Zhao et al. 2012). Principal components (PCs)
i¼1 are extracted by using PCA, while a PC is a linear com-
where Cfi is the contamination coefficient; CDi is the present bination of observable variables.
concentration of heavy metals in sediments; CRi is the pre- Factor analysis further reduces the contribution of less
industrial record of heavy metal concentration in sedi- significant variables obtained from PCA, and the new
group of variables, known as varifactors (VFs), are
ments; Eri is the potential risk of individual heavy metal; Tri
extracted through rotating the axis defined by PCA (Singh
is the toxic-response factor for a given heavy metal; and RI
et al. 2004). A VF may include unobservable and hypo-
is the sum of potential risk of heavy metal.
thetically latent variables.
Cluster analysis (CA)

Cluster analysis is a multivariate statistical method used to

classify the objects of the system into categories or clusters
based on their nearness or similarity (Varol and Sen 2009).
Hierarchical clustering is the most common approach,
where clusters are formed sequentially by starting with the
most similar pair of objects and forming higher clusters in a
step-by-step fashion (Varol and Sen 2012). The Euclidean
distance usually gives similarities between two samples,
and it can be calculated as:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Xn
dij ¼ ðxik  xjk Þ2 ð8Þ
k¼1
where dij is the distance between samples, n is the number
of samples and x is the sample of every cluster. CA was
often performed on the normalized data by Ward’s method
(Ward 1963), which analyzes variance approach to evalu-
ate the distances between clusters. It minimizes the sum of
distances of two arbitrary clusters that can be formed at
each step until all the clusters formed into one. CA has
been proven to be a powerful grouping mechanism
(Simeonov et al. 2000; Panda et al. 2006).
Principal component analysis (PCA) and factor analysis
(FA)
PCA is a pattern recognition technique that attempts to
interpret the variance within a large set of intercorrelated
variables by converting them into a smaller set of
Results
Five pollution indices of heavy metals in water and sedi-
ment, namely Zn, Cu, Pb, Cr and Cd, were selected, which
were the most polluted metals in the Yanghe River. The
other metals such as Fe, Hg and As were relatively in very
low level in the river and were not measured.
Heavy metal contamination in water body
The results of heavy metal concentrations in water samples
of the Yanghe River are shown in Table 2. The average
concentration of heavy metal in water body followed a
decreasing order of Zn [ Cu [ Pb [ Cr [ Cd. The aver-
age concentrations of Cu and Zn were higher in August
(2.26 and 9.03 lg/L) than those in November (1.26 and
8.38 lg/L). However, the average concentrations of Cd, Pb
and Cr were lower in August (0.07, 0.89 and 0.21 lg/L,
respectively) than those in November (0.10, 1.31 and
0.43 lg/L, respectively). The lower concentration of heavy
metal might be due to the dilution of high river discharge,
and the higher concentration of Cu and Zn might be due to
the increased domestic sewage and industrial runoff
entering the river in August. The maximum concentration
of all heavy metal in both wet season and dry seasons did
not exceed the threshold value required by the drinking
water standard of China.
In order to establish relationships between heavy metal
in water body with physical and chemical properties such

123
1105 Page 6 of 13 Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105

Table 2 Concentrations of
Metal Cu Zn Cd Pb Cr
heavy metals in water body
(lg/L) Aug. Nov. Aug. Nov. Aug. Nov. Aug. Nov. Aug. Nov.

Max 3.73 1.91 18.8 12.9 0.1 0.15 1.83 1.76 0.25 0.51
Min 1.28 1.05 5.16 4.1 0.04 0.04 0.59 1.02 0.14 0.32
Mean 2.26 1.26 9.03 8.38 0.07 0.10 0.89 1.31 0.21 0.43

Table 3 Pearson correlation

Cuw Znw Cdw Pbw Crw pH SAL COD SS
matrix in water body
Cuw 1
Znw -0.405 1
Cdw -0.306 -0.011 1
Pbw -0.482 0.506a 0.620a 1
Crw -0.552a -0.194 0.353 0.364 1
pH -0.071 -0.066 0.472 0.204 0.261 1
SAL -0.140 -0.033 0.310 0.130 0.046 0.165 1
COD 0.415 0.137 -0.259 -0.277 20.622a 0.053 0.173 1
SS -0.261 0.204 0.423 0.697b 0.569a 0.284 -0.254 -0.370 1
Bold values represent correlation with significance, superscripts a and b represent significance at the 0.05
and 0.01 probability level, respectively, and subscript w represents heavy metal in water body

Table 4 Comparison of concentrations of heavy metal in riverbed sediments in the Yanghe River and other documented data from Fu et al.
(2014) (mg/kg dw)
Metal Yanghe River River and Lakes in China River and Lakes in the world
Aug. Nov.
Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range

Cu 29.1 14.2–48.7 21.7 10.5–31.6 91 1.3–924.5 191.1 0.8–5075.6

Zn 96.9 42.3–184 51.7 19.5–80.9 194.1 23.3–1250.5 388.7 3.9–8286.3
Cd 0.19 0.02–0.64 0.13 0.05–0.25 3 0.02–81.79 0.94 0.0–25.9
Pb 22 10.8–34.4 19.8 14.1–28.4 90.5 1.7–513.7 137.3 0.0–5778.1
Cr 33.4 12.6–93.5 55.1 26.1–95.7 76.6 2.7–229.6 51.51 0.0–234.6

as pH, salinity (SAL in Table 3), SS and COD, Pearson
correlation matrices were calculated and are shown in
Table 3. It implies that SS has a significant correlation with
Pb (r = 0.697, p \ 0.01) and Cr (r = 0.569, p \ 0.05),
COD has a close relation with Cr (r = -0.622, p \ 0.05),
while pH and SAL have no correlation with heavy metal in
water body.
Heavy metal contamination in riverbed sediment
The concentration ranges of heavy metal in riverbed
sediments were as follows: Cu, 10.5–48.7; Zn, 19.5–184;
Cd, 0.02–0.64; Pb, 10.8–34.4; and Cr, 12.6–95.7 mg/
kg dw. The average concentration of heavy metal was in
the descending order of Zn [ Cr [ Cu [ Pb [ Cd.
Table 4 shows the comparison of heavy metal concen-
trations in the riverbed sediments in the Yanghe River
with some reported data in other rivers in China and in
the world (Fu et al. 2014). It presents that the concen-
tration of Cu, Zn, Pb, Cr in other rivers in China is 2–4
times higher than those in the Yanghe River, and Cd is
about 20 times higher. When compared with rivers and
lakes in other countries in the world, the heavy metal
concentrations of Cu, Zn, Pb are much lower (i.e., 1/6–2/
3) in the Yanghe River.
Table 5 shows the correlation of heavy metal in water
body and in riverbed sediments. Cu in riverbed sediments
shows a significant correlation with Zn (r = 0.599,
p \ 0.05) and Cr (r = -0.528, p \ 0.05) in water body,
Zn in riverbed sediments has a significant correlation with

123
Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105 Page 7 of 13 1105

Table 5 Person correlation

Cuw Znw Cdw Pbw Crw Cus Zns Cds Pbs Crs
matrix between heavy metal in
water body and riverbed Cuw 1
sediments
Znw -0.405 1
Cdw -0.306 -0.011 1
Pbw -0.482 0.506a 0.620a 1
a
Crw 20.552 -0.194 0.353 0.364 1
a
Cus 0.173 0.599 0.100 0.207 20.528a 1
a
Zns 0.521 -0.291 -0.247 20.551 20.612a 0.265 1
Cds 0.320 -0.316 -0.242 -0.466 -0.267 0.110 0.851b 1
Pbs 0.003 0.427 0.261 0.225 -0.225 0.742b -0.077 -0.177 1
Crs -0.154 -0.150 0.416 0.218 0.416 0.066 -0.090 -0.051 -0.112 1
Subscript s represents heavy metal in riverbed sediments, others are defined as the same in Table 3

Table 6 CF and PLI values of

Site CF values PLI
heavy metal in riverbed
sediments Cu Zn Cd Pb Cr
Aug. Nov. Aug. Nov. Aug. Nov. Aug. Nov. Aug. Nov. Aug. Nov.

S1 2.44 1.37 0.96 1.08 0.48 1.84 1.35 0.92 0.42 1.11 0.91 1.23
S2 1.71 0.81 0.85 0.72 0.47 1.46 1.46 0.72 0.54 0.84 0.88 0.88
S3 1.41 0.52 0.62 0.29 0.32 0.77 0.97 0.62 0.65 0.57 0.71 0.53
S4 0.71 1.58 0.94 0.61 1.39 3.57 0.46 1.20 0.23 0.96 0.63 1.32
S5 1.07 1.42 1.67 1.19 2.87 3.16 0.89 1.13 0.30 1.23 1.07 1.49
S6 1.52 0.68 2.25 0.54 5.74 1.19 1.04 0.61 0.36 0.48 1.49 0.66
S7 1.37 0.97 1.44 0.90 1.42 1.66 0.74 0.92 1.73 1.21 1.29 1.10
S8 1.42 1.33 2.72 0.77 9.07 1.71 0.54 0.60 0.72 1.78 1.68 1.13
Mean 1.46 1.09 1.43 0.76 2.72 1.92 0.93 0.84 0.62 1.02 1.08 1.04

Pb (r = -0.551, p \ 0.05) and Cr (r = -0.612, p \ 0.05)
in water body. It is also found that Pb in riverbed sediments
has a positive correlation with Zn and Cd in water body,
implying that they may be from a common source. All
these present the same heavy metal does not have an
obvious correlation in water body and riverbed sediments,
which indicates that heavy metal in water body is not from
the natural source of contaminants release from riverbed
sediments, i.e., the anthropogenic discharge of pollutants
may be the main source.
Discussion
Due to no obvious correlation in water body and riverbed
sediments and very low concentration of heavy metal in
water body, the detailed discussions were made on the
heavy metals in riverbed sediments. Different methods
were used to assess heavy metal contaminations in riverbed
sediments, the spatial and temporal concentration varia-
tions of heavy metals were analyzed, and the sources of
heavy metals were identified.
Indices of heavy metal contamination in riverbed
sediments
The results of heavy metal contamination factors (CFs) and
pollution load index (PLI) are presented in Table 6. The CF
values were in the descending order of Cd [ Cu [
Zn [ Pb [ Cr in August and Cd [ Cu [ Cr [ Pb [ Zn in
November. The highest CF value was 9.07 for Cd at Site 8
in August, and the lowest was 0.23 for Cr at Site 4 in
August. Cd had the highest CF value on average, which is
categorized as a ‘‘moderate contamination.’’ The CF values
for Cd showed ‘‘considerable contamination’’ at Site 4 and
Site 5. The CF values for Cd indicated ‘‘considerable
contamination’’ and ‘‘very high contamination’’ at Site 6
and Site 8, respectively. The CF values for heavy metal
were below 3 at other sites, which suggest that the heavy
metal in riverbed sediments had low or moderate contam-
ination. Total contamination factors of heavy metal in
riverbed sediments followed the order of S8 [ S5 [ S6 [
S7 [ S1 [ S4 [ S2 [ S3.
The PLI values ranged from 0.53 to 1.68 for heavy metal
in riverbed sediments and followed the order of

123
1105 Page 8 of 13
Fig. 2 Geo-accumulation index (Igeo) value of heavy metal in
riverbed sediments
S8 [ S5 [ S7 [ S6 [ S1 [ S4 [ S2 [ S3. The PLI val-
ues at Site 2 and Site 3 were below 1 in two seasons,
indicating no heavy metal pollution in riverbed sediments.
Other sites, PLI values between 1 and 2, indicated that
pollution existed. The mean PLI values of 1.08 and 1.04 in
the wet and dry seasons, respectively, showed a progressive
deterioration of the riverbed sediments.
Figure 2 presents geo-accumulation index (Igeo) of
heavy metal in riverbed sediments. The Igeo values
decreased in the order of Cd [ Cu [ Zn [ Pb [ Cr. The
range of Igeo values for Cu and Zn were -1.70 to 0.52 and
-2.51 to 0.73, respectively, indicating unpolluted to
moderated pollutions in riverbed sediments. Cd had the
highest Igeo values, with a range from -2.70 to 2.13, which
means that the riverbed sediments in unpolluted to heavily
polluted, whereas the Igeo values of Pb and Cr were below
0, suggesting no pollution in riverbed sediments.
Spatial and temporal variation of heavy metal
in riverbed sediments
Concentrations of heavy metal in riverbed sediments varied
along the river in different seasons. As shown in Fig. 3,
concentrations of heavy metal at Sites 5, 6, 7 and 8 located
in the downstream of the river were much higher than those
at Sites 1, 2, 3 and 4 in the upstream of the river. Most of
the PLI values of heavy metal in the downstream were
more than 1, indicating heavy metal pollution. On the other
hand, majority of PLI values in the upstream were below 1,
which means no heavy metal pollution. The PLI values
followed the decreasing trends of S8 [ S6 [ S7 [ S5 [
S1 [ S2 [ S3 [ S4 in August and S5 [ S4 [ S1 [ S8 [
S7 [ S2 [ S6 [ S3 in November.
Potential ecological risk index (RI) was used to study
the potential risk of five kinds of heavy metal along the
123
Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105
Fig. 3 Pollution load index (PLI) value of heavy metal in riverbed
sediments
river in two seasons (Fig. 4). The decreasing trends of RI
values were similar as those of PLI values in both flood and
dry seasons. The RI value was the highest and Cd
accounted for 67.6 % of the RI value at Site 8 in August. In
general, the percentage of each heavy metal for the RI at all
sites was Cu: 8.4–35.6 %, Zn: 2.8–5.7 %, Cd: 7.0–67.6 %,
Pb: 4.9–33.7 %, Cr: 10.3–56.7 % in August and Cu:
15.1–39.2 %, Zn: 1.4–3.0 %, Cd: 19.9–39.3 %, Pb:
8.5–21.0 %, Cr: 29.4–57.5 % in November, respectively. It
is found that Zn had a rather low ecological risk, while Cd
and Cr posed a relatively high potential ecological risk.
Furthermore, the ecological risk of Cr was higher in
November than that in August.
Based on the RI values of heavy metal in riverbed
sediment samples, cluster analysis (CA) was applied to
group the similar sampling sites and different heavy metals
as shown in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively. The 8 sampling
sites were grouped into four clusters at (Dlink/Dmax) 9
100 % \ 20 %, where Dlink and Dmax are the link and max
distance between clusters, respectively. Cluster 1 (S8) was
located near the river mouth, where flow velocity decreased
and heavy metal accumulated in riverbed sediment. Cluster
2 (S6), located in the downstream of the river, also suffered
relatively high pollution. Cluster 3 (S4, S5) was in the
middle of the river, and the potential risk of heavy metal
changed dramatically in the two seasons (Fig. 4). Cluster 4
consisted of S1, S2, S3 and S7, and the potential risk of
heavy metal changed little in the two seasons (Fig. 4). S1,
S2 and S3 located in the upstream of the river, which were
lightly polluted. CA was performed on the heavy metal data
set and group the five heavy metals into three clusters at
(Dlink/Dmax) 9 100 % \ 10 %. Cluster 1 (Cd) corre-
sponded to high potential risk, and cluster 2 (Zn) corre-
sponded to low potential risk. Cluster 3 contained Cu, Pb
and Cr, which might be from the same source.
Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105
Fig. 4 Potential ecological risk index (RI) value of heavy metal in riverbed sediments in different seasons. a flood season in August and b dry
season in November
Fig. 5 Hierarchical dendrogram for riverbed sediment sampling sites
In general, heavy metal concentrations in riverbed
sediments varied differently in August and in November,
and the pollution in the downstream was much higher than
that in the upstream of the study area. In the upstream of
the river, the concentration of metal got lower when the
site moves further from the Funing development zone
(Funing County). The potential risks of S4 and S5 clus-
tered in one group showed different variation trend in both
flood and dry seasons (see Figs. 4, 5). Furthermore, in the
downstream of the river, the closer to the estuary the site
was, the higher level of heavy metal contamination was
found.
Page 9 of 13 1105
Fig. 6 Hierarchical dendrogram for heavy metal in riverbed
sediments
Source identification
The approaches of PCA and FA were applied to further
identify sources of heavy metal. PCA of the entire data set
(all heavy metal concentrations in riverbed sediments)
shown in Table 7 revealed three PCs with eigenvalues [ 1
which explained about 93.7 % of the total variance in the
data set. The first PC accounting for 38.8 % of the total
variance was correlated (loading [ 0.70) with Zn and Cd.
123
1105 Page 10 of 13 Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105

Table 7 Rotated component matrix for heavy metal elements in

sediments
Element Component
1 2 3

Cu 0.201 0.932 0.108

Zn 0.961 0.088 -0.046
Cd 0.958 -0.060 -0.013
Pb -0.168 0.934 -0.128
Cr -0.047 -0.013 0.996
Eigenvalue 1.937 1.732 1.018
% of variance explained 38.747 34.647 20.352
% of cumulative 38.747 73.394 93.746
PCA loadings [ 0.7 are shown in bold

The second PC accounting for 34.7 % of the total variance

was correlated with Pb and Cu. And the third PC
accounting for 20.4 % of the total variance was correlated
with Cr.
These PCs were subjected to varimax rotation and
generated VFs. Three VFs explained about 93.7 % of the
total variance. The relations among these heavy metals
based on the three components are illustrated in three-di-
mensional (3D) space (Fig. 7). The heavy metals assemble
into 3 groups. Pb and Cu are clustered in one major group,
indicating that they have similar patterns and sources. Zn
and Cd are included in the second group. Cr is far away
from the other heavy metals, implying a unique source.
Generally, Cu is used in car lubricants and Pb is used in
leaded gasoline (Fu et al. 2014). The Yanghe basin is a
tourism place and an important transportation area con-
necting the south and the north of China, which is crossed
by traffic arteries such as railways, the national road and
the coastal highway. This leads to the increase in Cu and
Pb, which could be a major source of the contamination.
The industrial source of Cd could be metal plating, coating
operations, transportation equipment, machinery and bak-
ing enamels, photography, television phosphors, etc.
(Suthar et al. 2009). These manufactured products have a
close relationship with human habitat. Zn is also common
in daily life, so Cd and Zn might come from domestic
sewage. Cr is mainly controlled by the parent materials and
associated with natural processes such as weathering of
rock and soil (Zhao et al. 2014).
Planting industry and animal industry gathered in the
Yanghe River basin. It was found that agricultural fertil-
izers in the river basin had close relationship with heavy
metal pollution (Guo and He 2013). Farm land occupies
large parts of the riverine area, and agricultural wastewater
can be a crucial cause of river contamination. Agrochem-
icals and fertilizers with heavy metal accumulate in soil
and then enter into the river system through irrigation water
Fig. 7 PCA results for riverbed sediment sampling sites
or rainfall. Except a small number of approved pesticides
contain, other heavy metals, Cu and Zn, are the extensively
used elements for pesticides in China (Luo et al. 2009).
Trace metal such as Cu and Zn are also presented in
livestock diets, the amount of which may be increased with
the feed additives in the countryside. And the content of
trace metal elements in animal manures consequently
increased with the use of the feed additives (Fan et al.
2013). So the heavy metals in livestock manures also pose
a potential threat to the river environment.
Figure 8 shows the main regional distributions in two
sides of the Yanghe River. In Funing County, COD dis-
charging from animal industry, paper industry, farming
industry and metal industry was 9073t, 4197t, 295t and 133
t, respectively, in 2012 (Hebei Development and Reform
Commission 2015). Due to the fact that the paper industries
are far from the Yanghe River, others are the main pollu-
tion emission industries and accounting for nearly 95 % of
COD pollution in the Yanghe River area. The agriculture
areas locate along the river, while the other industries
located near human habitats. In the upstream of the river,
domestic sewage played an inevitable role in the surface
sediment contamination. With the increase in the distance
between sampling site and Funing Town, the impact of
domestic wastewater decreased. In the estuarine area,
heavy metal in riverbed sediments was affected by the
interaction of river runoff and tidal current. Weak tide and
tidal current entering the Yanghe River through the mouth
will become even weaker; for example, the tidal current
velocity is less than 0.12 m/s at the mouth (Kuang et al.
2015), which imply that the tidal current limit (where the
maximum flood current can reach) will mainly be deter-
mined by runoff. Since the river runoff is much stronger in
the flood season than that in the dry season, the tidal

123
Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105
Fig. 8 Main regional
distributions in two sides of the
Yanghe River
current could reach S6 in the dry season, while it only
reaches S8 (very close to the mouth) in the flood season.
Therefore, the influence of saltwater intrusion leads to the
sediment deposition due to flocculation of fine sediments.
This resulted in the enrichment of heavy metal in riverbed
sediments in the estuarine area. A small tributary running
through northern part of the river discharged into the
Yanghe River at S8, which brought domestic wastewater
into the river from Beidaihe District with dense population
and tourist. Hence, the estuarine area suffered more heavy
metal contamination especially at around S8. S4 and S5,
with high RI values in both seasons shown in Fig. 4, were
situated near traffic arteries, and traffic has a close rela-
tionship with the variation of heavy metal concentrations.
Conclusions
In this work, several different tools, methods and indices
have been employed to assess the heavy metal contami-
nation in water body and riverbed sediments in the Yanghe
River, China. The average concentration of heavy metal in
water body was in the order of Zn [ Cu [ Pb [ Cr [ Cd,
but it followed the order of Zn [ Cr [ Cu [ Pb [ Cd in
riverbed sediments. All concentrations of heavy metal in
water body were much lower than the upper limit value
required by the drinking water quality standards, and the
Page 11 of 13 1105
average heavy metal concentrations in riverbed sediments
in the Yanghe River were lower than those in the other
reported rivers in China and in the world. No significant
correlation exists between corresponding metal in water
body and riverbed sediments, which imply that heavy metal
in water body is not released from contaminated riverbed
sediments.
The contamination factors (CFs) showed that Cd had
higher contamination level than other heavy metals in
riverbed sediments, and the total contamination factors of
heavy metal followed the order of S8 [ S5 [ S6 [ S7 [
S1 [ S4 [ S2 [ S3. The mean pollution load index (PLI)
in the range of 1.0–1.1 indicated a progressive deterioration
in riverbed sediments. The geo-accumulation index (Igeo)
revealed that the pollution decreased in the order of
Cd [ Cu [ Zn [ Pb [ Cr, with Cd having the heaviest
polluted and Pb and Cr nearly non-pollution in riverbed
sediments.
The potential ecological risk index (RI) had compatible
decreasing trends with the PLI values in both flood and dry
seasons. The highest PLI and potential ecological risk index
(RI) were found in riverbed sediment samples at Site 8 near
the Yanghe River mouth due to large amount of domestic
wastewater from densely populated Beidaihe District and
tourists in summer. Heavy metal concentrations in riverbed
sediments varied differently in both flood and dry seasons,
and the pollution in the downstream was much higher than
123
1105 Page 12 of 13
that in the upstream especially in the flood season. In the
upstream of the river, heavy metal contamination decreased
with the increasing distance from Funing Town due to
decreased domestic wastewater from Funing County.
However, in the downstream of the river, the contamination
level increased while close to the river mouth because of
dense population and tourists in the coastal zone. According
to principal component analysis (PCA) and factor analysis
(FA), domestic sewage appeared to be a major source of
heavy metal contamination in riverbed sediments, while the
tidal current, runoff, traffic, planting industry and animal
industry also played inevitable roles.
Acknowledgments This study is financially supported by the Marine
Public Welfare Program of China (201305003) and the Science and
Technology Program of the Oceanic Administration of Hebei Pro-
vince of China.
References
Barlas N, Akbulut N, Aydoğan M (2005) Assessment of heavy metal
residues in the sediment and water samples of Uluabat Lake,
Turkey. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 74(2):286–293
Cai JB, Li WQ, Liu N et al (2007) Characteristics of contaminated
sediments in Yanghe Reservoir. J Agro-Environ Sci
26(3):886–893
Chen JS, Liu YJ (1992) Research on heavy metals in water
environment in China. Chinese Environmental Science Publish-
ing House, Beijing
Cheng Z, Man YB, Nie XP et al (2013) Trophic relationships and
health risk assessments of trace metals in the aquaculture pond
ecosystem of Pearl River Delta, China. Chemosphere
90(7):2142–2148
Cook JA, Andrew SM, Johnson MS (1990) Lead, zinc, cadmium and
fluoride in small mammals from contaminated grass-land
established on fluorspar tailings. Water Air Soil Pollut 51:43–54
Cui L, Li Z (2006) Characteristics of soil phosphorus export by
surface runoff from gentle slope in Yanghe watershed. J Soil
Water Conserv 20(3):10–20
Dong A, Zhai S, Zabel M et al (2012) Heavy metals in Changjiang
estuarine and offshore sediments: responding to human activi-
ties. Acta Oceanol Sinica 31(2):88–101
Fan T, Ye WL, Chen HY et al (2013) Review on contamination and
remediation technology of heavy metal in agricultural soil. Ecol
Environ Sci 22(10):1727–1736
Fu J, Zhao C, Luo Y et al (2014) Heavy metals in surface sediments
of the Jialu River, China: their relations to environmental factors.
J Hazard Mater 270:102–109
Gaur VK, Gupta SK, Pandey SD et al (2005) Distribution of heavy
metals in sediment and water of river Gomti. Environ Monit
Assess 102(1–3):419–433
Guo R, He X (2013) Spatial variations and ecological risk assessment
of heavy metals in surface sediments on the upper reaches of
Hun River, Northeast China. Environ Earth Sci 70(3):1083–1090
Hakanson L (1980) An ecological risk index for aquatic pollution
control: a sedimentological approach. Water Res 14(8):975–1001
Hebei Development and Reform Commission (2015) The land
pollution source investigation and industrial structure optimiza-
tion in Beidaihe area. Hebei Development and Reform Com-
mission, Hebei
123
Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105
Hebei Province Department of Land and Resources (2007) Marine
resources investigation and evaluation in Hebei Province (Vol-
ume One). China Ocean Press, Beijing
Hou D, He J, Lü C et al (2013) Distribution characteristics and
potential ecological risk assessment of heavy metals (Cu, Pb, Zn,
Cd) in water and sediments from Lake Dalinouer, China.
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 93:135–144
Hu CF (2016) Coupling simulation and analysis of hydrodynamics
and water quality in Qinhuangdao rivers, estuaries and coastal
waters, master dissertation of Tongji University
Ip CCM, Li X, Li Y et al (2007) Trace metal distribution in sediments
of the Pearl River Estuary and the surrounding coastal area,
South China. Environ Pollut 147(2):311–323
Kuang CP, He LL, Zhang Y et al (2010) Comparison of wave fields
caused by four proposed beach nourishment schemes in
Beidaihe, China. J Hydrodynam B 22(5):719–725
Kuang CP, Li ZY, Gu J et al (2015) Study on spatial and temporal
characteristics of the COD in estuarine and coastal waters of the
Yanghe River and the Daihe River. China Environ Sci
35(12):3689–3697
Li Z, Yu J, Yang M et al (2010) Cyanobacterial population and
harmful metabolites dynamics during a bloom in Yanghe
Reservoir, North China. Harmful Algae 9(5):481–488
Liu J, Li Y, Zhang B et al (2009) Ecological risk of heavy metals in
sediments of the Luan River source water. Ecotoxicology
18(6):748–758
Liu SG, Lou S, Kuang CP et al (2011a) Water quality assessment by
pollution-index method in the coastal waters of Hebei Province
in western Bohai Sea, China. Mar Pollut Bull 62(10):2220–2229
Liu W, Zeng Z, Zhang R et al (2011b) Investigation report on
Qinhuangdao shellfish industry development. Mod Fish Inform
26(6):10–14
Loska K, Wiechula D (2003) Application of principal component
analysis for the estimation of source of heavy metal contami-
nation in surface sediments from the Rybnik Reservoir.
Chemosphere 51(8):723–733
Luo L, Ma Y, Zhang S et al (2009) An inventory of trace element
inputs to agricultural soils in China. J Environ Manage
90(8):2524–2530
Morillo J, Usero J, Gracia I (2004) Heavy metal distribution in marine
sediments from the southwest coast of Spain. Chemosphere
55(3):431–442
Müller G (1969) Index of geoaccumulation in sediments of the Rhine
River. GeoJournal 2:108–118
Onodera S, Saito M, Sawano M et al (2008) Effects of intensive
urbanization on the intrusion of shallow groundwater into deep
groundwater: examples from Bangkok and Jakarta. Sci Total
Environ 404(2–3):401–410
Pan Y, Kuang CP, Gu J et al (2014) Assessment of a measure for
water exchange strengthening of artificial headland-bays based
on shoreline change and flushing time. J Coastal Res
30(3):615–628
Panda UC, Sundaray SK, Rath P et al (2006) Application of factor
and cluster analysis for characterization of river and estuarine
water systems—a case study: Mahanadi River (India). J Hydrol
331(3–4):434–445
Pekey H (2006) The distribution and sources of heavy metals in Izmit
Bay surface sediments affected by a polluted stream. Mar Pollut
Bull 52(10):1197–1208
Phiri O, Mumba P, Moyo BHZ, Kadewa W (2005) Assessment of the
impact of industrial effluents on water quality of receiving rivers
in urban areas of Malawi. Int J Environ Sci Technol
2(3):237–244
Qi S, Leipe T, Rueckert P et al (2010) Geochemical sources,
deposition and enrichment of heavy metals in short sediment
Environ Earth Sci (2016) 75:1105
cores from the Pearl River Estuary, Southern China. J Mar Syst
82:S28–S42
Segura R, Arancibia V, Zúñiga MC et al (2006) Distribution of
copper, zinc, lead and cadmium concentrations in stream
sediments from the Mapocho River in Santiago, Chile.
J Geochem Explor 91(1–3):71–80
Shao DG, Song XY, Xia J et al (1999) Research on real-time optimal
flood dispatching model for Yanghe Reservoir. Adv Water Sci
10(02):36–40
Simeonov V, Massart DL, Andreev G et al (2000) Assessment of
metal pollution based on multivariate statistical modeling of ‘hot
spot’ sediments from the Black Sea. Chemosphere 41(9):
1411–1417
Sin SN, Chua H, Lo W et al (2001) Assessment of heavy metal
cations in sediments of Shing Mun River, Hong Kong. Environ
Int 26(5–6):297–301
Singh KP, Malik A, Mohan D et al (2004) Multivariate statistical
techniques for the evaluation of spatial and temporal variations
in water quality of Gomti River (India)—a case study. Water Res
38(18):3980–3992
State Environment Protection Agency (2004) The technical specifi-
cation for soil environment monitoring. HJ/T 166-2004
Suresh G, Ramasamy V, Meenakshisundaram V et al (2011) Influence
of mineralogical and heavy metal composition on natural
radionuclide concentrations in the river sediments. Appl Radiat
Isot 69(10):1466–1474
Suthar S, Nema AK, Chabukdhara M et al (2009) Assessment of
metals in water and sediments of Hindon River, India: impact of
industrial and urban discharges. J Hazard Mater 171(13):
1088–1095
Page 13 of 13 1105
The Yangtze Water Environment Monitoring Center (2013) Regula-
tion for water environmental monitoring. SL219–98
Varol M (2011) Assessment of heavy metal contamination in
sediments of the Tigris River (Turkey) using pollution indices
and multivariate statistical techniques. J Hazard Mater
195:355–364
Varol M, Şen B (2009) Assessment of surface water quality using
multivariate statistical techniques: a case study of Behrimaz
Stream, Turkey. Environ Monit Assess 159(1–4):543–553
Varol M, Şen B (2012) Assessment of nutrient and heavy metal
contamination in surface water and sediments of the upper Tigris
River, Turkey. Catena. 92:1–10
Wang LP, Zheng BH (2013) Eutrophication development and its key
affected factors in the Yanghe Reservoir. Acta Ecologica Dinica
33(3):1011–1017
Ward J (1963) Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective
function. J Am Stat Assoc 301(58):236–244
Yuan X, Zhang L, Li J et al (2014) Sediment properties and heavy
metal pollution assessment in the river, estuary and lake
environments of a fluvial plain, China. Catena 119:52–60
Zhang LY, Wang SR, Chu ZS et al (2010) Distribution characteristics
of phosphorus in sediment of Yanghe Reservoir and in soil of its
basin. China Environ Sci 30(11):1529–1536
Zhao Y, Xia XH, Yang ZF et al (2012) Assessment of water quality in
Baiyangdian Lake using multivariate statistical techniques.
Procedia Environ Sci 13:1213–1226
Zhao L, Xu Y, Hou H et al (2014) Source identification and health
risk assessment of metals in urban soils around the Tanggu
chemical industrial district, Tianjin, China. Sci Total Environ
468–469:654–662
123