城市公园景观水体上覆水溶解性有机质荧光光谱特征

doi:10.3964/j.issn.1000-0593(2025)03-0894-07

Abstract
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (3411 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract The overlying water is the interface between water and the atmosphere, and its water quality is an important indicator for evaluating the environmental quality of park landscape water. This study collected landscape overlying water samples from eight parks in Harbin urban and applied the three-dimensional fluorescence spectroscopy parallel factor analysis method to detect the fluorescence spectral characteristics of dissolved organic matter (DOM). DOM's source and composition characteristics and the correlation between fluorescence spectral index, component fluorescence intensity, and physicochemical index were analyzed. This provides a reference basis for the environmental quality evaluation and pollution prevention of urban park landscape water. The study results showed that DOM's fluorescence index (FI) ranged from 1.71 to 1.98, with an average value of 1.185, suggesting that the source of DOM has both exogenous and endogenous characteristics. The biological index (BI) ranged from 0.97 to 1.34, averaging 1.09; the freshness index (β/α) ranged from 0.91 to 1.19, averaging 1.101, indicating strong characteristics of the recently endogenous composed of DOM. The humification index (HI) ranged from 0.186 to 4.126, averaging at 2.143, indicating a low degree of humification. Five kinds of DOM fluorescent components were identified in the water samples: fulvic-like acid substance (Ultraviolet fulvic-like acid component C1, visible fulvic-like acid component C2), protein-like substance (tryptophan-like component C3, tyrosine-like component C5), and humic-like acid component (C4). The relative concentration of humic-like substances (C1, C2, and C4) was higher than that of protein-like substances. There was a significant (p<0.01) positive correlation among the three kinds of humic-like substances, and all were significantly (p<0.01) negatively correlated with C5. However, the correlation between C3 and other fluorescent components was insignificant (p>0.05). Various physicochemical indices' impact on FI was insignificant (p>0.05). The value of pH and BI, β/α (p<0.01) exhibited a significant positive correlation and a significant negative correlation with HI (p<0.05), respectively. The negative correlation between DO and C3 and the positive correlation between DO and C5 were significant (p<0.05). Humus-like substances were significantly positively correlated with TOC, TP (p<0.01), and COD (p<0.05), while fulvic-like acid substances were also significantly positively correlated with TN (p<0.05). Conversely, C5 negatively correlated with TOC and TP (p<0.01). Based on the principal component analysis results of the overlying water physicochemical indices DOM fluorescence spectral index and component fluorescence intensity, it can be concluded that compared to the fluorescence spectral index, the fluorescence intensity of humic-like substances and C5 can better distinguish different water samples and be used to evaluate the environmental quality of landscape water.

Key words：Three-dimensional fluorescence spectrum;Landscape water;Dissolved organic matter;Spectral index;Fluorescence intensity

Received: 2024-02-26 Accepted: 2024-07-13

ZTFLH:

X832

Corresponding Authors: LI Zi-wei E-mail: zlivic@163.com

Cite this article:

SHI Chuan-qi,LI Yan,WEI Dan, et al. Fluorescence Spectral Characteristics of Dissolved Organic Matter in Landscape Overlying Water of Urban Park[J]. SPECTROSCOPY AND SPECTRAL ANALYSIS, 2025, 45(03): 894-900.

URL:

https://www.gpxygpfx.com/EN/10.3964/j.issn.1000-0593(2025)03-0894-07 OR https://www.gpxygpfx.com/EN/Y2025/V45/I03/894

[1] SUN Qing-xuan，ZHANG Li，YANG Jia-chun（孙清轩，张莉，杨嘉春）. China Environmental Science（中国环境科学），2022，42（11）：5299.
[2] LI Chao-nan，HE Jie，ZHU Xue-hui，et al（李超男，何杰，朱学惠，等）. Environmental Science（环境科学），2022，43(1)：267.
[3] D'Andrilli J，Silverman V，Buckley S，et al. Environmental Science & Technology，2022，56（16）：11146.
[4] He J，Wu X，Zhi G Q，et al. Ecological Indicators，2022，142：109088.
[5] Kajan K，Osterholz H，Stegen J，et al. Water Research，2023，245：120653.
[6] ZHANG Ya-nan，ZHANG Li，SUN Qing-xuan，et al（张亚楠，张莉，孙清轩，等）. China Environmental Science（中国环境科学），2021，41（8）：3816.
[7] YU Hao，YANG Kai，WANG Xiao，et al（余浩，杨凯，王晓，等）. Environmental Chemistry（环境化学），2023，42（12）：4384.
[8] LÜ Jing-jing，GONG Wei-jin，DOU Yan-yan，et al（吕晶晶，龚为进，窦艳艳，等）. Spectroscopy and Spectral Analysis（光谱学与光谱分析），2020，40（5）：1541.
[9] LI Hai-bin，XIE Fa-zhi，LI Guo-lian，et al（李海斌，谢发之，李国莲，等）. China Environmental Science（中国环境科学），2022，42（7）：3306.
[10] WANG Bin，HUANG Ting-lin，LI Nan，et al（王斌，黄廷林，李楠，等）. China Environmental Science（中国环境科学），2022，42（3）：1309.
[11] HAN Yu-lin，WEI Hong，HAO Miao，et al（韩玉麟，魏红，郝淼，等）. Environmental Chemistry（环境化学），2021，40（3）：717.
[12] JIANG Dan-yang，PENG Wei-xuan，LIAO Si-ying，et al（蒋丹阳，彭玮瑄，廖思颖，等）. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae（环境科学学报），2021，41（6）：2201.
[13] ZHANG Dao-ping，ZHANG Ling-song，MENG Fan-sheng，et al（张道萍，张铃松，孟凡生，等）. Research of Environmental Sciences（环境科学研究），2021，34（5）：1099.
[14] AO Jing，WANG Tao，CHANG Rui-ying（敖静，王涛，常瑞英）. Chinese Journal of Soil Science（土壤通报），2022，53（3）：738.
[15] FU Jia-qi，GUI Shuang-lin，YI Qi-zhen，et al（付嘉琦，桂双林，易其臻，等）. Chinese Journal of Environmental Engineering（环境工程学报），2023，17（11）：3487.
[16] ZHANG Xiao-liang，WANG Hong-bo，YANG Fang，et al（张晓亮，王洪波，杨芳，等）. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology（环境工程技术学报），2022，12（3）：651.
[17] Tang J F，Wang W D，Yang L，et al. Science of the Total Environment，2020，707：136093.