Faulty of Geosciences and Environmental Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China.
Faulty of Geosciences and Environmental Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China.
Sci Total Environ. 2020 Nov 1;741:140383. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140383. Epub 2020 Jun 20.
The quality of groundwater in a region is regarded as a function of natural and anthropogenic factors. Receptor models have advantages in source identification and source apportionment by testing the physicochemical properties of receptor samples and emission sources. In our study, receptor models PMF and PCA-APCS-MLR were developed to qualitatively identify the latent sources of groundwater pollution in the study area and quantitatively evaluate the contribution of each source to groundwater quality. The performances of PMF and APCS-MLR models were compared to test their applicability on the assessment of groundwater pollution sources. Results showed that both of the models identified five sources of groundwater contamination with similar main load species of each potential source. The comparable source apportionment of species NO and NO with two models indicated the reliable source estimation for these species, whereas the contributions of sources to species Fe, Mn, Cl, SO and NH were significantly different due to the large variability of data, difference of uncertainty analysis and algorithm of unexplained variability in the two models. R-squared value between observation and model prediction was 0.603-0.931 in PMF and 0.497-0.859 in PCA-APCS-MLR. The significant disagreement of average source contribution was detected in agricultural source and unexplained variability using PMF and PCA-APCS-MLR models. Average contributions of other sources to groundwater quality parameters had similar estimates between the two models. Higher R and smaller proportion of unexplained variability in the PMF model suggested that PMF approach could provide more physically plausible source apportionment in the study area and a more realistic representation of groundwater pollution than solutions from PCA-APCS-MLR model. The study showed the advantages of application of multiple receptor models on achieving reliable source identification and apportionment, particularly, providing a better understanding of applicability of PMF and PCA-APCS-MLR models on the assessment of groundwater pollution sources.
该地区地下水质量被认为是自然和人为因素的函数。受体模型通过测试受体样本和排放源的物理化学性质,在源识别和源分配方面具有优势。在我们的研究中,开发了受体模型 PMF 和 PCA-APCS-MLR,以定性识别研究区域地下水污染的潜在来源,并定量评估每个来源对地下水质量的贡献。比较了 PMF 和 APCS-MLR 模型的性能,以测试它们在评估地下水污染源方面的适用性。结果表明,这两种模型都确定了五个地下水污染来源,每个潜在来源的主要负载物种相似。两种模型对物种 NO 和 NO 的可比源分配表明,这些物种的源估计是可靠的,而由于数据的巨大变异性、不确定性分析的差异以及两种模型中未解释变异性的算法不同,来源对物种 Fe、Mn、Cl、SO 和 NH 的贡献有显著差异。在 PMF 中,观测值与模型预测值之间的 R-squared 值为 0.603-0.931,在 PCA-APCS-MLR 中为 0.497-0.859。使用 PMF 和 PCA-APCS-MLR 模型检测到农业源和未解释变异性的平均源贡献存在显著差异。两种模型对其他来源对地下水质量参数的平均贡献估计相似。PMF 模型中更高的 R 和更小的未解释变异性比例表明,PMF 方法可以在研究区域提供更合理的源分配,并比 PCA-APCS-MLR 模型更真实地表示地下水污染。该研究表明,应用多种受体模型在实现可靠的源识别和分配方面具有优势,特别是可以更好地了解 PMF 和 PCA-APCS-MLR 模型在评估地下水污染源方面的适用性。