Advertisement

Comparisons of soil pretreatment methods for SF-ICP-MS determination of ultra-trace level plutonium in water soluble and exchangeable fractions

  • Youyi Ni
  • Jian Zheng
  • Qiuju Guo
  • Hai Wang
  • Keiko Tagami
  • Shigeo Uchida
Article

Abstract

In this study, we developed a method to evaluate the potentially bioavailable fraction of Pu in agricultural soils by determining their water soluble and exchangeable fractions. Three commonly used pretreatment methods were compared for their ability and performances to process the extracted solutions. Results showed that these three methods were able to obtain consistent Pu concentration results; however, based on the experimental performance factors, we considered that wet-ashing followed by Fe(OH)3 co-precipitation was the best pretreatment method, with which high 242Pu recoveries for the overall process were realized for the water soluble fraction (69.8%) and the exchangeable fraction (70.6%).

Keywords

Pu Bioavailability Fe(OH)3 co-precipitation Wet-ashing Total digestion 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), Japan, and the Grant of Fukushima Prefecture Related to Research and Development in Radiological Sciences. Youyi Ni thanks the China Scholarship Council for offering a scholarship (201606010056) to support his Ph.D. study.

References

  1. 1.
    United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (2000), Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation. Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes, I, United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zheng J, Tagami K, Uchida S (2013) Release of plutonium isotopes into the environment from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident: what is known and what needs to be known. Environ Sci Technol 47:9584–9595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thakur P, Khaing H, Salminen-Paatero S (2017) Plutonium in the atmosphere: a global perspective. J Environ Radioact 175:39–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    International Atomic Energy Agency (1973) Safe Handling of Radionuclides. Safety series, 1, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clarke RH, Dunster J, Nenot JC, Smith H, Voeltz G (1996) The environmental safety and health implications of plutonium. J Radiol Prot 16:91–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sokolik GA, Ovsiannikova SV, Ivanova TG, Leinova SL (2004) Soil-plant transfer of plutonium and americium in contaminated regions of Belarus after the Chernobyl catastrophe. Environ Int 30:939–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kennedy VH, Sanchez AL, Oughton DH, Rowland AP (1997) Use of single and sequential chemical extractants to assess radionuclide and heavy metal availability from soils for root uptake. Analyst 122:89–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fawaris BH, Johanson KJ (1995) Fractionation of caesium (137Cs) in coniferous forest soil in central Sweden. Sci Total Environ 170:221–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Evans EJ, Dekker AJ (1969) Effect of nitrogen on cesium-137 in soils and its uptake by oat plants. Can J Soil Sci 49:349–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oughton DH, Salbu B, Riise G, Lien H, Østby G, Nøren A (1992) Radionuclide mobility and bioavailability in Norwegian and Soviet soils. Analyst 117:481–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gleyzes C, Tellier S, Astruc M (2002) Fractionation studies of trace elements in contaminated soils and sediments. Trends in Anal Chem 21:451–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kenna TC (2009) Using sequential extraction techniques to assess the partitioning of plutonium and neptunium-237 from multiple sources in sediments from the Ob River (Siberia). J Environ Radioact 100:547–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Komosa A (2002) Study on geochemical association of plutonium in soil using sequential extraction procedure. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 252:121–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Menzies NW, Donn MJ, Kopittke PM (2007) Evaluation of extractants for estimation of the phytoavailable trace metals in soils. Environ Pollut 145:121–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goryachenkova TA, Kazinskaya IE, Clark SB, Novikov AP, Myasoedov BF (2005) Comparison of methods for assessing plutonium speciation in environmental objects. Radiochemistry 47:599–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Guillén J, Baeza A, Corbacho JA, Muñoz-Muñoz JG (2015) Migration of 137Cs, 90Sr, and 239+240Pu in Mediterranean forests: influence of bioavailability and association with organic acids in soil. J Environ Radioact 144:96–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Baeza A, Guillén J, Mietelski JW, Gaca P (2006) Soil-to-fungi transfer of 90Sr, 239+ 240Pu, and 241Am. Radiochim Acta 94:75–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Baeza A, Guillén J, Espinosa A, Aragón A, Gutierrez J (2005) A study of the bioavailability of 90Sr, 137Cs, and 239+240Pu in soils at two locations of Spain affected by different radionuclide contamination events. Radioprotection 40:61–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bunzl K, Flessa H, Kracke W, Schimmack W (1995) Association of fallout 239+240Pu and 241Am with various soil components in successive layers of a grassland soil. Environ Sci Technol 29:2513–2518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bunzl K, Kracke W, Schimmack W, Zelles L (1998) Forms of Fallout 137Cs and 239+240Pu in Successive Horizons of a Forest Soil. J Environ Radioact 39:55–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ovsiannikova S, Papenia M, Voinikava K, Brown J, Skipperud L, Sokolik G, Svirschevsky S (2010) Migration ability of plutonium and americium in the soils of Polessie State Radiation-Ecological Reserve. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 286:409–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cook GT, Baxter MS, Duncan HJ, Toole J, Malcolmson R (1984) Geochemical association of plutonium in the Caithness environment. Nucl Instruments Methods Phys Res. 223:517–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Komosa A, Orzel J, Michalik S (2007) Study on plutonium distribution between sequentially extracted phases of arable soils. IAEA-CN-145/114PGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Goryachenkova TA, Kazinskaya IE, Kuzovkina EV, Novikov AP, Myasoedov BF (2009) Association of radionuclides with colloids in soil solutions. Radiochemistry 51:201–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Croudace I, Warwick P, Taylor R, Dee S (1998) Rapid procedure for plutonium and uranium determination in soils using a borate fusion followed by ion-exchange and extraction chromatography. Anal Chim Acta 371:217–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    National Institute of Radiological Sciences (2010) Report on Biospheric Assessment for Waste Disposal (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zheng J (2015) Evaluation of a new sector-field ICP-MS with Jet Interface for ultra-trace determination of Pu isotopes: from femtogram to attogram levels. J Nucl Radiochem Sci 15:7–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sohrin Y, Isshiki K (2005) Co-precipitation, in Chemistry of Sea and Lake. Part II. Analytical chemistry of trace elements in hydrosphere (in Japanese). Kyoto University Press, Kyoto, JapanGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bu WT, Zheng J, Guo QJ, Aono T, Tazoe H, Tagami K, Uchida S, Yamada M (2014) A method of measurement of 239Pu, 240Pu, 241Pu in high U content marine sediments by sector field ICP-MS and its application to Fukushima sediment samples. Environ Sci Technol 48:534–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Staunton S, Roubaud M (1997) Adsorption of 137Cs on montmorillonite and illite: effect of charge compensating cation, ionic strength, concentration of Cs, K and fulvic acid. Clay Miner 45:251–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lu N, Reimus PW, Parker GR, Conca JL, Triay IR (2003) Sorption kinetics and impact of temperature, ionic strength and colloid concentration on the adsorption of plutonium-239 by inorganic colloids. Radiochim Acta 91:713–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Qiao JX, Hou XL, Roos P, Lachner J, Christl M, Xu YH (2013) Sequential injection approach for simultaneous determination of ultratrace plutonium and neptunium in urine with accelerator mass spectrometry. Anal Chem 85:8826–8833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mocak J, Bond AM, Mitchell S, Scollary GA (1997) Statistical overview of standard (IUPAC and ACS) and new procedures for determining the limits of detection and quantification: application to voltammetric and stripping techniques (Technical Report). Pure Appl Chem 69:297–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Varga Z, Surányi G, Vajda N, Stefánka Z (2007) Rapid sequential determination of americium and plutonium in sediment and soil samples by ICP-SFMS and alpha-spectrometry. Radiochim Acta 95:81–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Truscott J, Jones P, Fairman B, Evans E (2003) Determination of actinide elements at femtogram per gram levels in environmental samples by on-line solid phase extraction and sector-field-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. Anal Chim Acta 433:245–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang ZT, Zheng J, Ni YY, Men W, Tagami K, Uchida S (2017) High-performance method for determination of Pu isotopes in soil and sediment samples by sector field-inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Anal Chem 89:2221–2226CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, School of PhysicsPeking UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.Biospheric Assessment for Waste Disposal TeamNational Institute of Radiological Sciences, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and TechnologyChibaJapan
  3. 3.Fukushima Project HeadquartersNational Institute of Radiological Sciences, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and TechnologyChibaJapan
  4. 4.School of Nuclear Science and TechnologyUniversity of South ChinaHengyangChina

Personalised recommendations