Back to all available

Deep Arsenic Mobilization in Karst Soils: Effects of Pedogenesis and Grazing

agricultural-science
ecology
soil-science
natural-resource-management
environmental-impacts

Abstract

Arsenic (As) poses significant ecological and health risks in karst regions due to its high natural background and enhanced mobility. To clarify the soil As fates under anthropogenic impacts , soil profiles under diverse agroecosystems ( secondary forest land, abandoned cropland, and grazing shrubland ) in a typical karst area were analyzed. Little difference s in As contents were identified between secondary forest (19.00 ~ 41.17 mg/kg), abandoned cropland (22.55 ~ 34.47 mg/kg), and shrubland (14.19 ~ 34.46 mg/kg), indicating dominant geogenic origins from carbonate weathering . Long-term cultivation homogenized As distribution in surface soils through plowing and crop uptake, whereas grazing introduced organic As via excreta, promoting deeper accumulation. Although ecological risk indices remained below critical thresholds (environmental factor: 0.76 ~2.34, contaminated factor: 0.71 ~ 2.06) , the high mobility of As and its potential synergy with other toxic elements underscore non-negligible contamination risks. Health risk (HI: 0.09 ~ 0.21) assessments indicate low non-carcinogenic risks for all exposure pathways, yet carcinogenic risks for children (HI: 0.11 ~ 0.21) approach levels of concern. T he need s for continued monitoring and sustainable land-use management to mitigate As mobilization and protect soil quality in vulnerable karst terrains are essential .
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].