Principal components analysis of potential sources of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin and dibenzofuran residues in surficial sediments from Newark Bay, New Jersey

The distributions of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and dibenzofurans (PCDFs) measured in surficial sediments from the lower Passaic River and Newark Bay, New Jersey, USA, were compared to those reported in various industrial process residues and effluents, contaminated soils, chemical fo...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of environmental contamination and toxicology 1993-04, Vol.24 (3), p.271-289
Hauptverfasser: WENNING, R. J, PAUSTENBACH, D. J, HARRIS, M. A, BEDBURY, H
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The distributions of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and dibenzofurans (PCDFs) measured in surficial sediments from the lower Passaic River and Newark Bay, New Jersey, USA, were compared to those reported in various industrial process residues and effluents, contaminated soils, chemical formulations, and municipal waste disposal activities that are known or suspected to be sources of these compounds in the aquatic environment. Comparisons were conducted using data from published literature to determine whether the composition of tetra through octachlorinated congeners and 2.3.7.8-substituted residues reported in a broad range of potential environmental sources could explain the presence of these compounds in Newark Bay. Pattern similarities and differences between congener groups and isomers were obtained by principal components analysis. The congener and isomer fingerprint patterns found in surficial sediments appear to be the result of releases from several industrial and municipal sources. The available evidence indicates that the vast majority of the PCDDs and PCDFs in Newark Bay are the result of contributions from several industries. There is no evidence from this analysis to indicate that a single source is responsible for the contamination.
ISSN:0090-4341
1432-0703
DOI:10.1007/BF01128726