Advertisement

Using spatial statistics to identify the uranium hotspot in groundwater in the mid-eastern Gangetic plain, India

  • Deepak Kumar
  • Anshuman Singh
  • Rishi Kumar Jha
  • Sunil Kumar Sahoo
  • Vivekanand Jha
Original Article
  • 109 Downloads

Abstract

The occurrence of uranium in groundwater is of particular interest due to its toxicological and radiological properties. It has been considered as a relevant contaminant for drinking water even at a low concentration. Uranium is a ubiquitously occurring radionuclide in the environment. Four hundred and fifty-six (456) groundwater samples from different locations of five districts of South Bihar (SB) were collected and concentrations of uranium (U) were analyzed using a light-emitting diode (LED) fluorimetric technique. Uranium concentrations in groundwater samples varied from 0.1 µg l−1 to 238.2 µg l−1 with an average value of 12.3 µg l−1 in five districts of Bihar in the mid-eastern Gangetic plain. This study used hot spot spatial statistics to identify the distribution of elevated uranium concentration in groundwater. The hypothesis whether spatial distribution of high value and low value of U is more likely spatially clustered due to random process near a uranium hotspot in groundwater was tested based on z score and Getis-Ord Gi* statistics. The method implemented in this study, can be utilized in the field of risk assessment and decision making to locate potential areas of contamination.

Keywords

LED fluorimeter Groundwater Uranium Getis-Ord Gi* statistic Hot spot analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Board of Research and Nuclear Sciences under Department of Atomic Energy, India by providing financial assistance under the National Uranium project (NUP) (BRNS Project Ref. No.: 36(4)/14/10/2014-BRNS). Authors are also profoundly grateful to the associate editors for their careful reading of our manuscript and their many insightful comments and suggestions to improve the manuscript. We also thank the National Institute of Technology, Patna for their support in carrying out the experimental work.

References

  1. Adler H (1974) Concepts of uranium-ore formation in reducing environments in sandstones and other sediments. Form Uranium Ore Deposits 141–168Google Scholar
  2. AERB (2004) Drinking water specifications in India. Department of Atomic Energy, Govt of IndiaGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajay K, Manpreet K, Rohit M, Sumit S, Rosaline M, Singh KP, Bajwa BS (2016) Quantification and assessment of health risk due to ingestion of uranium in groundwater of Jammu district, Jammu & Kashmir, India. J Radioanal Nuclear Chem 310:793–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Albrecht J (2007) Key concepts and techniques in GIS. Sage, Thousand OaksCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater American Public Health Association. APHA), Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  6. Arzuaga X, Rieth SH, Bathija A, Cooper GS (2010) Renal effects of exposure to natural and depleted uranium: a review of the epidemiologic and experimental data. J Toxicol Environ Health Part B 13:527–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bajwa B, Kumar S, Singh S, Sahoo S, Tripathi R (2015) Uranium and other heavy toxic elements distribution in the drinking water samples of SW-Punjab, India. J Radiat Res Appl SciGoogle Scholar
  8. Balbudhe A, Srivastava S, Vishwaprasad K, Srivastava G, Tripathi R, Puranik V (2011) Assessment of age-dependent uranium intake due to drinking water in Hyderabad. India Radiat Protect Dosimetry 148:502–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bernhard G, Geipel G, Reich T, Brendler V, Amayri S, Nitsche H (2001) Uranyl (VI) carbonate complex formation: Validation of the Ca2UO2 (CO3) 3 (aq.) species. Radiochim Acta 89:511–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. BIS (2012) Indian Standards Specifications for Drinking Water vol IS: 10500. Bureau of Indian Standards, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  11. Brugge D, deLemos JL, Oldmixon B (2005) Exposure pathways and health effects associated with chemical and radiological toxicity of natural uranium: a review. Rev Environ Health 20:177–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chainey S, Tompson L, Uhlig S (2008) The utility of hotspot mapping for predicting spatial patterns of crime. Secur J 21:4–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Curtis GP, Davis JA, Kohler M (2008) Reactive transport of hexavalent uranium in ground water with variable geochemical conditions. In: Joint Meeting of The Geological Society of America, Soil Science Society of America, American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies with the Gulf Coast Section of SEPM, 2008Google Scholar
  14. Ding L, Chen K-L, Liu T, Cheng S-G, Wang X (2015) Spatial–temporal hotspot pattern analysis of provincial environmental pollution incidents and related regional sustainable management in China in the period 1995–2012. Sustainability 7:14385–14407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duda RO, Hart PE, Stork DG (2012) Pattern classification. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  16. Duggal V, Sharma S, Saini K, Bajwa BS (2017) Assessment of carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk from exposure to Uranium in groundwater from Western Haryana. India J Geol Soc India 89:663–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Essien I, Sandoval D, Kuroda P (1985) Deposition of excess amount of natural U from the atmosphere. Health Phys 48:325–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fischer MM, Getis A (2009) Handbook of applied spatial analysis: software tools, methods and applications. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  19. Getis A, Ord JK (1992) The analysis of spatial association by use of distance statistics. Geogr Anal 24:189–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Giri S, Jha V (2012) Risk assessment (chemical and radiological) due to intake of uranium through the ingestion of drinking water around two proposed uranium mining areas, Jharkhand, India. Radioprotection 47:543–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grubesic TH (2006) On the application of fuzzy clustering for crime hot spot detection. J Quant Criminol 22:77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grubesic TH, Wei R, Murray AT (2014) Spatial clustering overview and comparison: Accuracy, sensitivity, and computational expense. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 104:1134–1156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kalaikumaran T, Karthik S (2012) Data mining techniques for detecting the crime hotspot by using GIS. IJARCET 1:228–231Google Scholar
  24. Kalmykov SN, Choppin GR (2000) Mixed Ca2+/UO2 2+/CO3 2-complex formation at different ionic strengths. Radiochim Acta 88:603–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Konietzka R (2015) Gastrointestinal absorption of uranium compounds—a review. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 71:125–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kumar A et al (2011) Risk assessment for natural uranium in subsurface water of Punjab State. India Human Ecol Risk Assess 17:381–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kurttio P, Komulainen H, Leino A, Salonen L, Auvinen A, Saha H (2005) Bone as a possible target of chemical toxicity of natural uranium in drinking water. Environ Health Perspect 113:68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Li W, Xu B, Song Q, Liu X, Xu J, Brookes PC (2014) The identification of ‘hotspots’ of heavy metal pollution in soil–rice systems at a regional scale in eastern China. Sci Total Environ 472:407–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mittermeier RA, Myers N, Thomsen JB, Da Fonseca GA, Olivieri S (1998) Biodiversity hotspots and major tropical wilderness areas: approaches to setting conservation priorities. Conserv Biol 12:516–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Myers N (1988) Threatened biotas:” hot spots” in tropical forests. Environmentalist 8:187–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, Da Fonseca GA, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nolan J, Weber KA (2015) Natural uranium contamination in major US aquifers linked to nitrate. Environ Sci Technol Lett 2:215–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ord JK, Getis A (1995) Local spatial autocorrelation statistics: distributional issues and an application. Geogr Anal 27:286–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Paul M, Sen S (2012) The occurrence of TDS and conductivity of domestic water in Lumding Town of Nowgong District of Assam, NE India. Curr World Environ 7:251–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. R Core Team (2014) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/
  36. Rana B, Dhumale M, Lenka P, Sahoo S, Ravi P, Tripathi R (2016) A study of natural uranium content in groundwater around Tummalapalle uranium mining and processing facility. India J Radioanal Nuclear Chem 307:1499–1506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rangel JD, del Río HL, García FM, Torres LQ, Villalba M, Sujo LC, Cabrera MM (2002) Radioactivity in bottled waters sold in Mexico. Appl Radiat Isot 56:931–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rani A, Singh S, Duggal V, Balaram V (2013) Uranium estimation in drinking water samples from some areas of Punjab and Himachal Pradesh, India using ICP–MS. Radiat Protect Dosimetry 157:146–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rishi MS, Keesari T, Sharma DA, Pant D, Sinha UK (2017) Spatial trends in uranium distribution in groundwaters of Southwest Punjab, India—a hydrochemical perspective. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 311:1937–1945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sahoo S, Mohapatra S, Chakrabarty A, Sumesh C, Jha V, Tripathi R, Puranik V (2010) Determination of uranium at ultra trace level in packaged drinking water by laser fluorimeter and consequent ingestion dose. Radioprotection 45:55–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Saini K, Singh P, Bajwa BS (2016) Comparative statistical analysis of carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic effects of uranium in groundwater samples from different regions of Punjab. India. Appl Radiat Isotopes 118:196–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Singh B, Kataria N, Garg V, Yadav P, Kishore N, Pulhani V (2014) Uranium quantification in groundwater and health risk from its ingestion in Haryana, India. Toxicol Environ Chem 96:1571–1580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tadmor J (1986) Atmospheric release of volatilized species of radioelements from coal-fired plants. Health Phys 50:270–273Google Scholar
  44. Timofeev A, Migdisov AA, Williams-Jones AE, Roback R, Nelson AT, Xu H (2018) Uranium transport in acidic brines under reducing conditions. Nature Commun 9:1469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. USEPA (2004) Risk-assessment guidance for superfund. Volume 1. Human health evaluation manual (Part E. Supplemental Guidance dermal risk assessement) Final. EPA/540/R/99/005 OSWER 9285.7-02EPPB99-963312 July 2004 Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC. Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  46. USEPA (2011) United States environmental protection agency 2011 vol EPA 820-R-11-002. United States Environmental Protection Agency 2011, Office of Water EPA 820-R-11-002,USEPA, DCGoogle Scholar
  47. WHO (2004) IPCS risk assessment terminology. World Health OrganizationGoogle Scholar
  48. WHO (2012) Guidelines for drinking-water quality. WHO Chron 38:104–108Google Scholar
  49. Wu X, Grubesic TH (2010) Identifying irregularly shaped crime hot-spots using a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm. J Geogr Syst 12:409–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yadav AK, Sahoo SK, Mahapatra S, Kumar AV, Pandey G, Lenka P, Tripathi R (2014) Concentrations of uranium in drinking water and cumulative, age-dependent radiation doses in four districts of Uttar Pradesh, India. Toxicol Environ Chem 96:192–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yang Y-H, Zhou F, Guo H-C, Sheng H, Liu H, Dao X, He C-J (2010) Analysis of spatial and temporal water pollution patterns in Lake Dianchi using multivariate statistical methods. Environ Monit Assess 170:407–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringNational Institute of Technology PatnaPatnaIndia
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsNational Institute of Technology PatnaPatnaIndia
  3. 3.Environmental Assessment DivisionBhabha Atomic Research CentreMumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations