边缘化社区遇到障碍,可能会阻止土壤监测工作和知识转移。为了应对这一挑战,本研究比较了两种分析方法:便携式X射线荧光光谱法(pXRF,更少的时间,成本)和电感耦合等离子体质谱法(ICP-MS,“黄金标准”)。表层土壤样本是从亚利桑那州的居民点收集的,美国(N=124)和公共区域在特洛伊,纽约,美国(N=33)。群体之间的土壤整备不同,以解释社区实践。进行了统计计算,配对t检验,Bland-Altman阴谋,双向方差分析表明,As没有显著差异,Ba,Ca,Cu,Mn,Pb,t检验中除Ba外的Zn浓度。熨斗,Ni,Cr,亚利桑那州土壤和V的K在统计学上不同,Ni,Fe,纽约土壤的铝浓度在统计学上有所不同。锌是唯一具有高R2和低p值的元素。污染负荷指数(PLI),富集因子(EF),使用美国地质调查局数据计算了两种方法的地质累积指数(Igeo)。PLI>1,表明两个州的土壤污染。在pXRF和ICP-MS之间,亚利桑那州的Igeo和EF对大多数元素的污染程度相似,除了花园中的Zn和院子中的Pb,分别。对于纽约,As的Igeo,Cu,锌在两种方法中只有一个分类指标不同。pXRF在测定As方面是可靠的,Ba,Ca,Cu,Mn,Pb,和锌在受影响的社区。因此,pXRF可以是使用ICP-MS技术筛选土壤样品中的几种与环境相关的污染物以保护环境公共健康的具有成本效益的替代方法。
Marginalized communities experience barriers that can prevent soil monitoring efforts and knowledge transfer. To address this challenge, this study compared two analytical methods: portable X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (pXRF, less time, cost) and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS, \"gold standard\"). Surface soil samples were collected from residential sites in Arizona, USA (N = 124) and public areas in Troy, New York, USA (N = 33). Soil preparation differed between groups to account for community practice. Statistical calculations were conducted, paired t test, Bland-Altman plot, and a two-way ANOVA indicated no significant difference for As, Ba, Ca, Cu, Mn, Pb, and Zn concentrations except for Ba in the t test. Iron, Ni, Cr, and K were statistically different for Arizona soils and V, Ni, Fe, and Al concentrations were statistically different for New York soils. Zinc was the only element with high R2 and low p value. Pollution load index (PLI), enrichment factors (EF), and geo-accumulation index (Igeo) were calculated for both methods using U.S. Geological Survey data. The PLI were > 1, indicating soil pollution in the two states. Between pXRF and ICP-MS, the Igeo and EF in Arizona had similar degree of contamination for most elements except Zn in garden and Pb in yard, respectively. For New York, the Igeo of As, Cu, and Zn differed by only one classification index between the two methods. The pXRF was reliable in determining As, Ba, Ca, Cu, Mn, Pb, and Zn in impacted communities. Therefore, the pXRF can be a cost-effective alternative to using ICP-MS techniques to screen soil samples for several environmentally relevant contaminants to protect environmental public health.