Next Article in Journal
Assessment of Groundwater Potential Zones by Integrating Hydrogeological Data, Geographic Information Systems, Remote Sensing, and Analytical Hierarchical Process Techniques in the Jinan Karst Spring Basin of China
Previous Article in Journal
Model-Based Construction of Wastewater Treatment Plant Influent Data for Simulation Studies
Previous Article in Special Issue
Trace Element Patterns in Shells of Mussels (Bivalvia) Allow to Distinguish between Fresh- and Brackish-Water Coastal Environments of the Subarctic and Boreal Zone
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Trace Element Composition of the Dissolved Matter Runoff of the Russian Arctic Rivers

by
Alla V. Savenko
1,* and
Vitaly S. Savenko
2
1
Faculty of Geology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119991 Moscow, Russia
2
Faculty of Geography, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119991 Moscow, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2024, 16(4), 565; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16040565
Submission received: 23 January 2024 / Revised: 8 February 2024 / Accepted: 12 February 2024 / Published: 14 February 2024

Abstract

:
Data on the content of dissolved trace elements (P, Si, Li, Rb, Cs, Be, Sr, Ba, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, Tl, Pb, Al, Ga, Y, Ti, Zr, Hf, Th, U, rare earth elements, F, B, Ge, V, As, Sb, Cr, Se, Mo, and W) in the river runoff from the Russian Arctic sea watersheds were systematized and generalized. There is a tendency for the decrease in the trace element concentrations in the direction from west to east for the considered Arctic watersheds (the White, Pechora, Kara, Laptev, and East Siberian seas). It was shown that the concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the river runoff from the Russian Arctic sea watersheds are in general consistent with modern estimates of the average composition of the global river runoff.

1. Introduction

The chemical composition of dissolved matter from river runoff, which is one of the main inputs that affects the ocean’s geochemical balance, with the exception of cyclic salts, is formed as a result of the weathering of rocks in land catchment areas. Currently, an extensive database on the basic salt composition of the waters of the world’s largest rivers was established, and fairly reliable estimates of the ion fluxes in the ocean were obtained [1,2,3,4]. Similar reports on dissolved trace elements [5,6] were compiled from a much smaller volume of factual material and should be considered as purely preliminary estimates.
It can be assumed that the petrographic differences in the lithogenic basis of watersheds decrease as their areas increase, due to which the specific chemical composition of river runoff from higher-order watersheds is formed to a greater extent under the influence of climatic factors. In this regard, it is important to expand the database based on the concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the river waters of various climatic zones.
For a long time, the authors systematically studied the abundance of dissolved trace elements in the waters of the outlet sections (mouth reaches) of large, medium, and small rivers of the Russian Arctic using modern, highly sensitive analytical methods. The objective of this work is to systematize and generalize the results of these studies [7,8,9,10] (including the unpublished data from A.V. Savenko) in conjunction with data from other literature sources [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28] and to estimate the mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the river runoff from the White, Pechora, Kara, Laptev, and East Siberian sea watersheds.

2. Materials and Methods

Information about the location of the considered rivers, the long-term average water runoff in the outlet sections, observation periods, the phases of the hydrological regime during sampling, and the number of analyzed water samples are presented in Figure 1 and Table 1. The total number of river water samples was 217, 109, 535, 112, and 98 for the White, Pechora, Kara, Laptev, and East Siberian sea watersheds, respectively. At the same time, at least 5 water samples were collected in each river outlet section during periodic hydrological and hydrochemical surveys, which covered different phases of the hydrological regime for the majority of rivers. The mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the outlets of large and medium rivers or a group of small rivers were calculated using all available information on these water bodies: research data from the authors and literature sources. The averaged composition of the runoff from the Arctic sea watersheds was obtained while taking into account the ratio of the volumes of the long-term average water runoff of the studied rivers. This ensured that the mean concentrations estimates are reasonably representative.
The authors carried out natural observations and an analysis of water samples as follows. Water samples were taken with a plastic bathometer and immediately after boarding, were filtered through an acetate–cellulose membrane filter with a pore diameter of 0.45 μm into 3 containers, hermetically sealed and placed in sealed plastic bags:
  • Plastic flasks measuring 100 mL with the addition of 1 mL of chloroform to determine the content of mineral phosphorus and silicon by standard colorimetric methods with ammonium molybdate;
  • Similar flasks measuring 30 mL without a preservative for measuring the fluoride content by direct potentiometry with a fluoride ion-selective electrode in the presence of acetate saline buffer;
  • Polypropylene tubes measuring 10 mL with 0.25 mL of 5 N nitric acid of ultrapure grade previously added under laboratory conditions to determine the concentrations of all other trace elements using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) on an Agilent 7500 ce instrument.
The relative measurement error was ±3%. The accuracy of the analyses was assessed using the international river water standards SLRS-4 and SLRS-5, for which the discrepancy between the measured and certified concentrations of the studied elements did not exceed 20%.
Most of the literature data over the past 20–25 years were obtained using a similar sample preparation procedure and analytical measurements. In the 1990s, the most common method for the determination of heavy metals and other trace cations was atomic absorption with atomization in a graphite cuvette, the results of which showed close agreement with those of ICP-MS.

3. Results and Discussion

The results of the calculations of the mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the river waters of the Russian Arctic watersheds in comparison with estimates of the average composition of the global river runoff are given in Table 2 and Table 3. Due to the rather strong spatial–temporal variability of dissolved trace element concentrations in the river waters and a relatively small number of measurements for most of them, discrepancies in the average values of 2–3 times are usually not taken into account, and only differences of more than half an order of magnitude (>5 times) are considered significant.
Considering the data on the mouth reaches of the rivers of the White and Pechora sea watersheds, it can be argued that the concentrations of most of the trace elements dissolved in their waters have similar values. The mean concentrations of P, Si, Li, Rb, Be, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Cd, Pb, Ga, Y, rare earth elements, B, Ge, As, Sb, Se, and Mo differ by less than two times the average. Concentrations of Cs, Sr, Ba, Tl, Al, Ti, Zr, Hf, Th, U, V, and Cr in the Pechora Sea watershed are 2–3 times lower, and the Zn concentration is 2.8 times higher compared to the White Sea watershed. Significant differences are found only for W, the content of which in the Pechora River waters is eight times less than that in the rivers of the White Sea watershed. In general, the concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the Pechora River are slightly lower than the mean values of the rivers of the White Sea watershed (Figure 2a), which can be associated with the presence of continuous permafrost in the Pechora River watershed (7% [34]), leading to a decrease in the intensity of the processes of chemical element mobilization. At the same time, based on the similarity of the trace element composition of river waters, the White and Pechora sea watersheds can be generalized into a conjoint watershed of the European territory of the Russian Arctic.
In the watersheds of the Asian territory of the Russian Arctic (Figure 2b,c), the concentrations of many dissolved trace elements (Li, Rb, Cs, Be, Sr, Ba, Mn, Fe, Zn, Cd, Pb, and B) are lower than those in the watersheds of the corresponding European territory. These elements are characterized by a tendency to decrease in concentration from west to east, i.e., with increasing climate severity and the prevalence of continuous permafrost. This trend is not seen for hydrolysate elements (Al, Y, rare earth elements, Zr, Hf, Th, and U) and Tl due to their increased concentrations in the Lena River waters of the Laptev Sea watershed (Figure 2b), and it is also not clearly observed for Co, Ni, Cu, Ga, Ti, and anionogenic elements (F, P, Si, Ge, V, As, Sb, Cr, Se, Mo, and W), the content of which is not systematically varied, differing in the studied watersheds by no more than 5–7 times the average. Along with this, the concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the river waters of the easternmost watershed of the East Siberian Sea (the Kolyma River) are generally 3.1 times lower than for the White and Pechora sea watersheds, and 1.8 times lower compared to the Kara and Laptev sea watersheds (Figure 3):
CESS = 0.32CWPS,  r = 0.82,
CESS = 0.54CKLS,  r = 0.94.
A comparison of the mean chemical composition of the waters of the mouth reaches of rivers of the Russian Arctic sea watersheds and the global river runoff shows a fairly close correspondence between the concentrations of most trace elements (Figure 2, Table 2 and Table 3). The largest and systematic discrepancies were found for W, Cs, Zn, and Cd.
The W and Cs content in river waters carried to all seas of the Russian Arctic is significantly lower than estimates [6] for the global river runoff. Since the concentrations of W and Cs in river waters were rarely determined using modern, high-sensitivity analytical methods, it can be assumed that the average content of these elements in the global river runoff is overstated; however, an alternative explanation is also possible and is related to the overall lower content of dissolved trace elements in the river runoff from the Russian Arctic sea watersheds.
Another systematic discrepancy was noted for Zn and Cd. The mean Zn concentrations in the river waters of different seas of the Russian Arctic watersheds are in the range of 0.9–11.5 μg/L, and the minimum values (0.9–2.2 μg/L) refer to the watersheds of its Asian territory, which are characterized by the low intensity of weathering processes and experience the least anthropogenic impact. According to [6], the average Zn content in the global river runoff is equal to 0.6 µg/L, which is 7 and 19 times lower than the estimate for the river runoff leading into the White and Pechora seas. The reason for this discrepancy is not clear. It is possible that the estimate [6] is low, since the mean Zn concentration in the global river runoff is noticeably lower than that of Cu, which is detected extremely rarely in river waters (usually the opposite relationship occurs). In addition, other estimates of the mean Zn concentration in the global river runoff (20–30 μg/L [35,36]) are an order of magnitude higher than the value suggested in [6]. For Cd, an element with similar chemical and geochemical properties to Zn, its average concentration in rivers of the world, on the contrary, is much higher than in the runoff from the Russian Arctic sea watersheds, and the discrepancy increases from west to east, reaching a maximum for the East Siberian Sea watershed.
Many authors believe that anthropogenic sources have a strong influence on the concentrations of Zn and Cd in terrestrial surface waters. From this point of view, the decrease in Zn and Cd concentrations in the river runoff from west to east of the Russian Arctic territory has a logical explanation since the intensity of anthropogenic processes and associated anthropogenic pollution decreases in the same direction; however, this assumption is contradicted by the weak variability of Pb concentrations in all studied watersheds of the Russian Arctic, which is consistent with the world average value given in [6].
Thus, the data presented in this review show a fairly close correspondence between the mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the river runoff from the Russian Arctic sea watersheds and those in the river waters of the world. Significant discrepancies were established only for W, Cs, Zn, and Cd.

4. Conclusions

The concentrations of dissolved trace elements (P, Si, Li, Rb, Be, Sr, Ba, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Tl, Pb, Al, Ga, Y, Ti, Zr, Hf, Th, U, rare earth elements, F, B, Ge, V, As, Sb, Cr, Se, and Mo) in the river runoff from the Russian Arctic sea watersheds are generally consistent with estimates of their average content based on the global river runoff. Significant systematic differences in the mean chemical composition of river waters in the Russian Arctic sea watersheds and that of the river waters of the world (up to an order of magnitude) are observed only for dissolved W, Cs, Zn, and Cd.
Correlation relationships between the mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the waters of the considered Arctic watersheds show a tendency to decrease in the direction from west to east. The concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the river waters of the easternmost watershed of the East Siberian Sea are generally 1.8 times lower than those of the Kara and Laptev sea watersheds, and 3.1 times lower compared to those of the White and Pechora sea watersheds.

Author Contributions

A.V.S. conceived the study; A.V.S. and V.S.S. jointly carried out the research and wrote the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation No. 24-27-00275, https://rscf.ru/en/project/24-27-00275/ (accessed on 23 January 2024).

Data Availability Statement

Data supporting the reported results can be found in the studies cited in the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to N.A. Demidenko and M.N. Kozhin for collecting water samples from the rivers of the White Sea watershed for chemical analyses.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Livingstone, D.A. Chemical Composition of Rivers and Lakes. U.S. Government Publishing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 1963; 440, pp. 1–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Alekin, O.A.; Brazhnikova, L.V. Dissolved Matter Runoff from the Territory of the USSR; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 1964; pp. 1–144. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  3. Meybeck, M. Pathways of major elements from land to ocean through rivers. In River Inputs to Ocean Systems; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 1981; pp. 18–30. [Google Scholar]
  4. Meybeck, M. Global occurrence of major elements in rivers. In Treatise on Geochemistry; Drever, J.I., Holland, H.D., Turekian, K.K., Eds.; Elsevier–Pergamon: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2004; Volume 5, pp. 207–223. [Google Scholar]
  5. Gordeev, V.V. Geochemistry of the River–Sea System; IP I.I. Matushkina: Moscow, Russia, 2012; pp. 1–452. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  6. Gaillardet, J.; Viers, J.; Dupre, B. Trace elements in river waters. In Treatise on Geochemistry, 2nd ed.; Holland, H.D., Turekian, K.K., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014; Volume 7, pp. 195–235. [Google Scholar]
  7. Savenko, A.V.; Pokrovsky, O.S. Distribution of dissolved matter in the Yenisei estuary and adjacent Kara Sea areas and its inter-annual variability. Geochem. Int. 2019, 57, 1201–1212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Savenko, A.V.; Savenko, V.S.; Efimov, V.A. Present-day fluorine concentration in the Ob River water. Lomonosov Geography J. 2023, 78, 132–138. [Google Scholar]
  9. Savenko, A.V.; Savenko, V.S.; Efimov, V.A.; Pokrovsky, O.S. Trace element composition of the waters of the mouth of the Kolyma River. Doklady Earth Sci. 2023, 508, 102–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Savenko, A.V.; Savenko, V.S.; Efimov, V.A. Fluorine concentrations in the Lena R. water from 1995 to 2021. Water Resour. 2023, 50, S172–S176. [Google Scholar]
  11. Guay, C.K.H.; Zhulidov, A.V.; Robarts, R.D.; Zhulidov, D.A.; Gurtovaya, T.Y.; Holmes, R.M.; Headley, J.V. Measurements of Cd, Cu, Pb and Zn in the lower reaches of major Eurasian arctic rivers using trace metal clean techniques. Environ. Pollut. 2010, 158, 624–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Pokrovsky, O.S.; Viers, J.; Shirokova, L.S.; Shevchenko, V.P.; Filippov, A.S.; Dupre, B. Dissolved, suspended, and colloidal fluxes of organic carbon, major and trace elements in the Severnaya Dvina River and its tributary. Chem. Geol. 2010, 273, 136–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chupakov, A.V.; Pokrovsky, O.S.; Moreva, O.Y.; Shirokova, L.S.; Neverova, N.V.; Chupakova, A.A.; Kotova, E.I.; Vorobyeva, T.Y. High resolution multi-annual riverine fluxes of organic carbon, nutrient and trace element from the largest European Arctic river, Severnaya Dvina. Chem. Geol. 2020, 538, 119491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chupakov, A.V.; Pokrovsky, O.S.; Moreva, O.Y.; Kotova, E.I.; Vorobyeva, T.Y.; Shirokova, L.S. Export of organic carbon, nutrients and metals by the mid-sized Pechora River to the Arctic Ocean. Chem. Geol. 2023, 632, 121524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Gordeev, V.V.; Beeskow, B.; Rachold, V. Geochemistry of the Ob and Yenisey estuaries: A comparative study. Berichte Polar- und Meeresforsch. 2007, 565, 1–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Demina, L.L.; Gordeev, V.V.; Galkin, S.V.; Kravchishina, M.D.; Aleksankina, S.P. The biogeochemistry of some heavy metals and metalloids in the Ob River estuary—Kara Sea section. Oceanology 2010, 50, 729–742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Gordeev, V.V.; Pokrovsky, O.S.; Zhulidov, A.V.; Filippov, A.S.; Gurtovaya, T.Y.; Holmes, R.M.; Kosmenko, L.S.; McClelland, J.W.; Tank, S.E. Dissolved major and trace elements in the largest Eurasian Arctic rivers: Ob, Yenisey, Lena, and Kolyma. Water 2024, 16, 316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. McClelland, J.W.; Tank, S.E.; Spencer, R.G.M.; Shiklomanov, A.I.; Zolkos, S.; Holmes, R.M. Arctic Great Rivers Observatory. Water Quality Dataset. Version 20230314. Available online: https://arcticgreatrivers.org/data (accessed on 16 January 2024).
  19. Kolesnichenko, I.; Kolesnichenko, L.G.; Vorobyev, S.N.; Shirokova, L.S.; Semiletov, I.P.; Dudarev, O.V.; Vorobev, R.S.; Shavrina, U.; Kirpotin, S.N.; Pokrovsky, O.S. Landscape, soil, lithology, climate and permafrost control on dissolved carbon, major and trace elements in the Ob River, Western Siberia. Water 2021, 13, 3189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Soromotin, A.; Moskovchenko, D.; Khoroshavin, V.; Prikhodko, N.; Puzanov, A.; Kirillov, V.; Koveshnikov, M.; Krylova, E.; Krasnenko, A.; Pechkin, A. Major, trace and rare earth element distribution in water, suspended particulate matter and stream sediments of the Ob River mouth. Water 2022, 14, 2442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pokrovsky, O.S.; Manasypov, R.M.; Loiko, S.V.; Krickov, I.A.; Kopysov, S.G.; Kolesnichenko, L.G.; Vorobyev, S.N.; Kirpotin, S.N. Trace element transport in western Siberian rivers across a permafrost gradient. Biogeosciences 2016, 13, 1877–1900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Pokrovsky, O.S.; Manasypov, R.M.; Chupakov, A.V.; Kopysov, S.G. Element transport in the Taz River, western Siberia. Chem. Geol. 2022, 614, 121180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Martin, J.M.; Guan, D.M.; Elbaz-Poulichet, F.; Thomas, A.J.; Gordeev, V.V. Preliminary assessment of the distributions of some trace elements (As, Cd, Cu, Fe, Ni, Pb and Zn) in a pristine aquatic environment: The Lena River estuary (Russia). Marine Chem. 1993, 43, 185–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Guieu, C.; Huang, W.W.; Martin, J.M.; Yong, Y.Y. Outflow of trace metals into the Laptev Sea by the Lena River. Marine Chem. 1996, 53, 255–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Holemann, J.A.; Schirmacher, M.; Prange, A. Dissolved and particulate major and trace elements in newly formed ice from the Laptev Sea (Transdrift III, October 1995). In Land–Ocean Systems in the Siberian Arctic: Dynamics and History; Kassens, H., Bauch, H.A., Dmitrenko, I.A., Eicken, H., Hubberten, H.-W., Melles, M., Thiede, J., Timokhov, L.A., Eds.; Springer–Verlag: Berlin, Germany, 1999; pp. 101–111. [Google Scholar]
  26. Holemann, J.A.; Schirmacher, M.; Prange, A. Seasonal variability of trace metals in the Lena River and the southeastern Laptev Sea: Impact of the spring freshet. Glob. Planet. Change 2005, 48, 112–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Vorobyev, S.N.; Kolesnichenko, Y.; Korets, M.A.; Pokrovsky, O.S. Testing landscape, climate and lithology impact on carbon, major and trace elements of the Lena River and its tributaries during a spring flood period. Water 2021, 13, 2093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bryzgalo, V.A.; Nikanorov, A.M.; Kosmenko, L.S.; Reshetnyak, O.S. Estuary Ecosystems of Large Rivers in Russia: Anthropogenic Load and Ecological State; Southern Federal University Press: Rostov-on-Don, Russia, 2015; pp. 1–164. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  29. Ivanov, V.V.; Bryzgalo, V.A. Hydrological and hydrochemical regime of the White Sea watershed. In The White Sea and Their Watershed under Influences of Climate and Antropogenic Impact; Filatov, N.N., Terzhevik, A.Y., Eds.; Karelian Research Center of RAS: Petrozavodsk, Russia, 2007; pp. 119–145. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  30. Magritsky, D.V.; Frolova, N.L.; Evstigneev, V.M.; Povalishnikova, E.S.; Kireeva, M.B.; Pakhomova, O.M. Long-term changes of river water inflow into the seas of the Russian Arctic sector. Polarforschung 2018, 87, 177–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Savenko, V.S.; Savenko, A.V. Geochemistry of Phosphorus in the Global Hydrological Cycle; GEOS: Moscow, Russia, 2007; pp. 1–248. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  32. Gordeev, V.V.; Filippov, A.S.; Kravchishina, M.D.; Novigatsky, A.N.; Pokrovsky, O.S.; Shevchenko, V.P.; Dara, O.M. The geochemical peculiarities of the river discharge to the White Sea. In The White Sea System; Lisitzin, A.P., Nemirovskaya, I.A., Eds.; Nauchny Mir: Moscow, Russia, 2012; Volume 2, pp. 225–308. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  33. Gordeev, V.V. Trace elements in water, suspended matter and bottom sediments of the Ob and Yenisey estuaries and the Lena delta and in the adjacent areas of the Kara and Laptev seas. In System of the Laptev Sea and the Adjacent Arctic Seas: Modern and Past Environments; Kassens, H., Lisitzin, A.P., Thiede, J., Polyakova, Y.I., Timokhov, L.A., Frolov, I.E., Eds.; Moscow University Press: Moscow, Russia, 2009; pp. 202–224. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  34. Dolgopolova, E.N. The role of permafrost in the formation of the hydrological and morphological regime of river mouths in the Arctic Ocean watershed area. Arct. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 32, 55–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Gordeev, V.V. River Runoff into the Ocean and Specifics of Its Geochemistry; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 1983; pp. 1–160. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  36. Martin, J.M.; Meybeck, M. The content of major elements in the dissolved and particulate load of river. In Biogeochemistry of Estuarine Sediments; Forstner, U., Muller, G., Stoffers, P., Eds.; UNESCO Press: Paris, France, 1978; pp. 95–110. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Map of the Russian Arctic sea watersheds: (1) volumes of the long-term average water runoff in the outlet sections of the considered Arctic rivers in km3/y according to [29,30] (with additions); (2) boundaries of the considered Arctic river basins; (3) boundary of the Russian part of the Arctic Ocean watershed; (4) state borders.
Figure 1. Map of the Russian Arctic sea watersheds: (1) volumes of the long-term average water runoff in the outlet sections of the considered Arctic rivers in km3/y according to [29,30] (with additions); (2) boundaries of the considered Arctic river basins; (3) boundary of the Russian part of the Arctic Ocean watershed; (4) state borders.
Water 16 00565 g001
Figure 2. Comparison of the mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements (μg/L) in the waters of mouth reaches of rivers of the Russian Arctic sea watersheds with the global runoff (CGR). (a) Watersheds of the White and Pechora seas: (1) CWS is the mean for the rivers of Kandalaksha Bay, Onega, Kyanda, Severnaya Dvina, Kuloy, Mezen, and Semzha, taking into account the ratio of the volumes of their long-term average water runoff; (2) CPS is the mean for the Pechora River. (b) Watersheds of the Kara and Laptev seas: (1) CKS is the mean for the Ob, Pur, Taz, and Yenisei rivers, taking into account the ratio of the volumes of their long-term average water runoff; (2) CLS is the mean for the Lena River. (c) Watershed of the East Siberian Sea: CESS is the mean for the Kolyma River. Dash and dot-and-dash lines show three- and fivefold differences, respectively.
Figure 2. Comparison of the mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements (μg/L) in the waters of mouth reaches of rivers of the Russian Arctic sea watersheds with the global runoff (CGR). (a) Watersheds of the White and Pechora seas: (1) CWS is the mean for the rivers of Kandalaksha Bay, Onega, Kyanda, Severnaya Dvina, Kuloy, Mezen, and Semzha, taking into account the ratio of the volumes of their long-term average water runoff; (2) CPS is the mean for the Pechora River. (b) Watersheds of the Kara and Laptev seas: (1) CKS is the mean for the Ob, Pur, Taz, and Yenisei rivers, taking into account the ratio of the volumes of their long-term average water runoff; (2) CLS is the mean for the Lena River. (c) Watershed of the East Siberian Sea: CESS is the mean for the Kolyma River. Dash and dot-and-dash lines show three- and fivefold differences, respectively.
Water 16 00565 g002
Figure 3. Relationship between the mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the waters of mouth reaches of rivers of the different Russian Arctic sea watersheds. (a) Watershed of the East Siberian Sea (CESS is the mean for the Kolyma River) and watersheds of the White and Pechora seas (CWPS is the mean for the rivers of Kandalaksha Bay, Onega, Kyanda, Severnaya Dvina, Kuloy, Mezen, Semzha, and Pechora, taking into account the ratio of the volumes of their long-term average water runoff). (b) Watershed of the East Siberian Sea (CESS is the mean for the Kolyma River) and watersheds of the Kara and Laptev seas (CKLS is the mean for the Ob, Pur, Taz, Yenisei, and Lena rivers, taking into account the ratio of the volumes of their long-term average water runoff).
Figure 3. Relationship between the mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the waters of mouth reaches of rivers of the different Russian Arctic sea watersheds. (a) Watershed of the East Siberian Sea (CESS is the mean for the Kolyma River) and watersheds of the White and Pechora seas (CWPS is the mean for the rivers of Kandalaksha Bay, Onega, Kyanda, Severnaya Dvina, Kuloy, Mezen, Semzha, and Pechora, taking into account the ratio of the volumes of their long-term average water runoff). (b) Watershed of the East Siberian Sea (CESS is the mean for the Kolyma River) and watersheds of the Kara and Laptev seas (CKLS is the mean for the Ob, Pur, Taz, Yenisei, and Lena rivers, taking into account the ratio of the volumes of their long-term average water runoff).
Water 16 00565 g003
Table 1. Characteristic of water sampling in the mouth reaches of rivers of the Russian Arctic sea watersheds.
Table 1. Characteristic of water sampling in the mouth reaches of rivers of the Russian Arctic sea watersheds.
River
(Number of Water Samples)
Observation PeriodPhase
of the Hydrological Regime
Reference
White Sea watershed
Small rivers and streams of the
Kandalaksha Bay 1 (17)
July–September 2008,
July–August 2010
Summer–autumn
low-water period
Data from
A.V. Savenko
February 2010 and 2020Winter low-water period
June 2016Spring–summer flood
Onega (16)July 1998Summer–autumn
low-water period
[11]
June 2011Spring–summer floodData from
A.V. Savenko
January 2017Winter low-water period
August 2017Summer–autumn
low-water period
Kyanda (5)August 2016Summer–autumn
low-water period
Data from
A.V. Savenko
February 2017Winter low-water period
Severnaya Dvina (149)June 1998Summer–autumn
low-water period
[11]
2007–2008All phases[12]
2012–2014All phases[13]
July 2016, August 2017Summer–autumn
low-water period
Data from
A.V. Savenko
Kuloi (12)August 2018, July 2022Summer–autumn
low-water period
Data from
A.V. Savenko
February 2019Winter low-water period
Mezen (13)July 1998Summer–autumn
low-water period
[11]
July 2009, August 2015Summer–autumn
low-water period
Data from
A.V. Savenko
Semzha (5)August 2018Summer–autumn
low-water period
Data from
A.V. Savenko
Pechora Sea watershed
Pechora (109)2016–2019All phases[14]
Kara Sea watershed
Ob (176)1993–2001Summer–autumn
low-water period,
Winter low-water period
[15]
August 1998Summer–autumn
low-water period
[11]
September 2007Summer–autumn
low-water period
[16]
2004–2006All phases[17]
2009–2021All phases[18]
2018–2020All phases[8]
July 2016Spring–summer flood[19]
August 2020Summer–autumn
low-water period
[20]
Pur (5)June 2013 and 2014Spring–summer flood[21]
August 2013 and 2014Summer–autumn
low-water period
[21]
February 2014Winter low-water period[21]
Taz (243)June 2013 and 2014Spring–summer flood[21]
August 2013 and 2014Summer–autumn
low-water period
[21]
February 2014Winter low-water period[21]
2015–2020All phases[22]
Yenisei (120)1993–2001Summer–autumn
low-water period,
Winter low-water period
[15]
August 1998Summer–autumn
low-water period
[11]
August 2009, September 2010Summer–autumn
low-water period
[7]
March 2016Winter low-water period[7]
2004–2006All phases[17]
2009–2021All phases[18]
Laptev Sea watershed
Lena (112)September 1989Summer–autumn
low-water period
[23]
September 1991Summer–autumn
low-water period
[24]
October 1995Winter low-water period[25]
June 1996Spring–summer flood[26]
July 1995 and 2021Spring–summer flood[10]
2004–2006All phases[17]
2009–2021All phases[18]
June 2016Spring–summer flood[27]
East Siberian Sea watershed
Kolyma (98)2004–2006All phases[17]
2009–2021All phases[18]
July 2020Spring–summer flood[9]
July–August 2019,
August 2021
Summer–autumn
low-water period
[9]
1 Luvenga River, Kolvitsa River, Porya River, Kostarikha Stream, stream in Dolgaya Bay of Porya Inlet, Umba River, Chernaya River, Kuzreka River, Indera River, Chavanga River, and Strelna River.
Table 2. The mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the waters of mouth reaches of rivers of the White and Pechora sea watersheds, μg/L.
Table 2. The mean concentrations of dissolved trace elements in the waters of mouth reaches of rivers of the White and Pechora sea watersheds, μg/L.
ElementWhite Sea WatershedPechora Sea
Watershed (CPS)
Mean for the Rivers of the White and Pechora Seas
Watersheds (CWPS) 4
Rivers Worldwide 5 (CGR) C WS C GR C PS C GR C WPS C GR
Kandalaksha BayOnega BayDvina BayMezen BayMean for the Rivers of the White Sea
Watershed (CWS) 4
Small
Rivers and Streams 1: 2008, 2010, 2016, 2020
Onega River: 1998 2, 2011, 2017Kyanda River: 2016, 2017Severnaya Dvina
River:
1998 2, 2007–2008 3, 2012–2014 3, 2016, 2017
Kuloi River: 2018, 2019, 2022Mezen River: 1998 2, 2009, 2015Semzha River: 2018
Pechora River: 2016–
2019 [14]
Nutrients
Pmin 65.05.616.021.66.626.39.119.714.017.0380.520.370.45
Si 6240019501420266027303340332027003400303040700.660.840.74
Rare alkaline and alkaline earth elements
Li1.643.373.852.832.352.763.732.821.902.381.841.531.031.29
Rb0.970.940.980.790.991.341.600.910.590.761.630.560.360.47
Cs0.00820.00230.00370.00270.00570.00600.0100.00350.00110.00240.0110.320.100.22
Be0.00800.00380.00570.00750.00740.00890.640.840.83
Sr39.018792.430813116519825585.0175604.251.422.92
Ba6.5817.65.0528.728.810.96.1523.88.6016.6231.030.370.72
Heavy metals
Mn7.8116.945.032.331.89.5214.126.129.027.5340.770.850.81
Fe22238859527363.0157195255300276663.864.554.18
Co0.0350.0770.0950.0780.0740.0650.0800.0740.0570.0660.1480.500.390.45
Ni0.660.780.621.280.570.821.121.100.941.030.801.381.181.29
Cu1.280.620.851.711.401.291.501.501.401.451.481.010.950.98
Zn9.101.271.984.611.173.545.154.1111.57.590.606.8519.212.7
Cd0.0150.00430.0120.0120.0150.0210.0210.0130.0150.0140.0800.160.190.18
Tl0.00250.00320.00400.00370.00400.00390.00150.00260.0070.560.210.37
Pb0.1190.0520.1450.1280.0890.0920.1580.1130.1500.1300.0791.431.901.65
Hydrolysate elements
Al80.455.012558.026.286.357.222.039.0321.790.691.22
Ga0.0150.0160.0310.0190.0390.0380.0200.0110.0150.0300.670.370.50
Y0.1120.1900.2270.2000.1420.1330.2020.1820.1500.1670.0404.553.754.18
Ti1.391.221.701.260.641.001.230.440.820.492.510.901.67
Zr0.1050.1910.1970.2150.1320.2100.2040.0750.1370.0395.231.923.51
Hf0.0190.00720.0100.00750.0120.0140.00820.00340.00570.00591.390.580.97
Th0.0130.0230.0340.0180.0360.0280.0190.00840.0140.0410.460.200.34
U0.0880.2050.0940.2080.2700.1460.1550.1950.0840.1430.3720.520.230.38
Rare earth elements
La0.1630.1780.2250.1650.1510.1330.2200.1600.1100.1370.1201.330.921.14
Ce0.2540.3300.4520.3000.2590.2340.4580.2890.1700.2330.2621.100.650.89
Pr0.0460.0560.0670.0470.0420.0380.0510.0460.0310.0390.0401.150.780.98
Nd0.1600.2410.2800.2350.1620.1650.2720.2180.1300.1770.1521.430.861.16
Sm0.0360.0490.0580.0440.0370.0330.0480.0420.0280.0350.0361.170.780.97
Eu0.00410.0120.0170.0140.00840.00820.0120.0120.00760.0100.00981.220.781.02
Gd0.0200.0480.0570.0480.0390.0340.0560.0440.0310.0380.0401.100.780.95
Tb0.00250.00620.00790.00740.00550.00540.00770.00670.00460.00570.00551.220.841.04
Dy0.0150.0370.0400.0400.0320.0280.0400.0370.0250.0310.0301.230.831.03
Ho0.00320.00690.00760.00700.00590.00520.00750.00650.00500.00580.00710.920.700.82
Er0.00790.0190.0250.0190.0170.0140.0250.0180.0140.0160.0200.900.700.80
Tm0.00170.00250.00320.00250.00240.00220.00300.00240.00190.00220.00330.730.580.67
Yb0.00750.0170.0210.0170.0160.0130.0210.0160.0120.0140.0170.940.710.82
Lu0.00150.00210.00270.00250.00200.00180.00290.00230.00180.00210.00240.960.750.88
Anionogenic elements
F95.915890.62191311091091001.091.09
B26.119.712.018.232.224.180.020.319.019.710.21.991.861.93
Ge0.0130.00980.00900.0100.0110.0110.0100.0180.0140.00681.472.652.06
V0.430.590.720.640.431.420.620.220.410.710.870.310.58
As0.190.500.650.730.531.471.160.810.570.700.621.310.921.13
Sb0.0330.0440.0510.0450.0420.0580.0720.0470.0280.0380.070.670.400.54
Cr0.350.690.650.340.150.370.370.170.270.700.530.240.39
Se0.0490.0620.0560.0450.0460.070.800.640.66
Mo0.270.170.250.360.280.350.300.330.170.260.420.790.400.62
W0.0180.00640.0100.00780.0120.0100.00120.00530.100.100.010.05
1 Luvenga River, Kolvitsa River, Porya River, Kostarikha Stream, stream in Dolgaya Bay of Porya Inlet, Umba River, Chernaya River, Kuzreka River, Indera River, Chavanga River, and Strelna River. 2 Data [11] on Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb. 3 Weighted mean concentrations considering the river water runoff for hydrological year of 2007–2008 [12] and 2012–2014 [13]. 4 Taking into account the ratio of the volumes of the long-term average water runoff of rivers according to [29,30] (with additions). 5 Pmin [31], Si [4], F [5], and other trace elements [6]. 6 The obtained data are of the same order with the estimates of the long-term average concentrations of Pmin and Si, equal to 3.9 and 3450 µg/L for the Onega River, 11.1 and 2095 µg/L for the Severnaya Dvina River, and 7.2 and 2840 µg/L for the Mezen River, respectively, according to [32], and equal to 6.7 and 1990 µg/L for the Onega River, 13.0 and 2450 µg/L for the Severnaya Dvina River, and 40.2 and 2960 µg/L for the Pechora River, respectively, according to [28].
Table 3. The mean concentration of dissolved trace elements in the waters of mouth reaches of rivers of the Kara, Laptev, and East Siberian sea watersheds, μg/L.
Table 3. The mean concentration of dissolved trace elements in the waters of mouth reaches of rivers of the Kara, Laptev, and East Siberian sea watersheds, μg/L.
ElementKara Sea WatershedLaptev Sea Watershed (CLS)East
Siberian Sea Watershed (CESS)
Rivers Worldwide 4 (CGR) C KS C GR C LS C GR C ESS C GR
Ob BayYenisei BayMean for the Rivers of the
Kara Sea Watershed (CKS) 2
Ob River: 1993–2001 1 [15], 2007 [16], 2004–2006 [17], 2009–2021 [18], 2016 [19], 2020–2021 [20]Pur River: 2013–2014 [21]Taz River: 2013–2014 [21], 2015–2020 [22]Yenisei River: 1993–2001 1 [15], 2009, 2010, 2016 [7], 2004–2006 [17], 2009–2021 [18]
Lena River: 1989–1996 3, 2004–2006 [17], 2009–2021 [18], 2016 [27]Kolyma
River: 2004–2006 [17], 2009–2021 [18], 2019–2021 [9]
Nutrients
Pmin 547.212110514.933.45.65.1380.880.150.13
Si 5241048004700291028502330249040700.700.570.61
Rare alkaline and alkaline earth elements
Li2.641.101.932.161.750.921.841.170.950.50
Rb0.780.700.490.610.560.251.630.370.340.15
Cs0.00190.00120.00220.00200.00180.00170.0110.180.160.15
Be0.00700.00700.00580.00890.790.65
Sr99.017.441.016112912476.5602.152.071.28
Ba16.417.810.29.1812.114.210.4230.530.620.45
Heavy metals
Mn24.352.42066.1522.28.784.06340.650.260.12
Fe28656854365.518080.051.5662.731.210.78
Co0.1190.1020.2250.0400.0780.0580.0460.1480.530.390.31
Ni1.661.041.200.611.030.580.910.801.290.731.14
Cu1.890.800.681.411.541.131.111.481.040.760.75
Zn4.097.480.612.201.860.930.603.673.101.55
Cd0.0110.00540.00820.00390.00670.00560.00460.0800.080.070.06
Tl0.00250.00130.00400.00330.00530.00210.0070.470.760.30
Pb0.1100.1570.0760.0910.0990.0730.0860.0791.250.921.09
Hydrolysate elements
Al15.635.626.817.517.776.242.7320.552.381.33
Ga0.00760.0200.00450.00630.0130.0160.0300.210.430.53
Y0.1850.1500.1010.1350.2990.0810.0403.387.482.03
Ti0.270.390.540.460.390.700.560.490.801.431.14
Zr0.0980.0900.1700.1400.1960.0790.0393.595.032.03
Hf0.00900.00300.00420.00600.0170.00390.00591.022.880.66
Th0.0310.00900.0220.0250.1060.0140.0410.612.590.34
U0.2750.0160.2370.2420.3130.0380.3720.650.840.10
Rare earth elements
La0.1380.1450.0800.1180.1250.4990.0470.1201.044.160.39
Ce0.2330.1500.2210.2230.7860.0870.2620.853.000.33
Pr0.0380.0200.0350.0360.1180.0150.0400.902.950.38
Nd0.1580.1000.1160.1310.4590.0660.1520.863.020.43
Sm0.0390.0300.0280.0320.0860.0200.0360.892.390.56
Eu0.0100.00700.00800.00870.0160.00530.00980.891.630.54
Gd0.0410.0300.0360.0380.0860.0220.0400.952.150.55
Tb0.00560.00400.00480.00510.0110.00280.00550.932.000.51
Dy0.0340.0200.0330.0330.0590.0170.0301.101.970.57
Ho0.00650.00500.00610.00620.0120.00310.00710.871.690.44
Er0.0190.0100.0200.0190.0320.00930.0200.951.600.47
Tm0.00400.00200.00380.00520.00090.00331.151.580.27
Yb0.0170.0140.0190.0180.0280.00780.0171.061.650.46
Lu0.00240.00200.00290.00270.00410.00120.00241.131.710.50
Anionogenic elements
F86.0 6145122101 784.91001.221.010.85
B17.912.411.09.9012.95.012.9610.21.260.490.29
Ge0.00920.0300.00760.00910.0100.0120.00681.341.471.76
V0.940.500.960.930.510.260.711.310.720.37
As0.880.310.720.350.560.280.450.620.900.450.73
Sb0.1260.0200.0300.0660.0170.0680.070.940.240.97
Cr0.240.310.320.170.210.240.0730.700.300.340.10
Se0.0310.0310.0850.070.441.21
Mo0.360.090.500.430.220.140.421.020.520.33
W0.00960.00400.00800.00840.00650.00340.100.080.070.03
1 The concentrations of Pmin and Si were averaged using monitoring data for 1975–1995 and expeditionary research data for 1993–2003. Averaging of Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb concentrations was performed using data [11] for 1998. 2 Taking into account the ratio of the volumes of the long-term average water runoff of rivers according to [30]. 3 Generalization of data [23,24,25,26] on Mn, Fe, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb in [33]. 4 Pmin [31], Si [4], F [5], and other trace elements [6]. 5 The obtained data are of the same order with the estimates [28] of the long-term average concentrations of Pmin and Si, equal to 76.1 and 3670 µg/L for the Ob River, 8.6 and 3110 µg/L for the Yenisei River, 6.8 and 2030 µg/L for the Lena River, and 5.0 and 2690 µg/L for the Kolyma River, respectively; for the Pur and Taz rivers, the long-term average concentrations are given according to [28] for 1980–2012. 6 Weighted mean concentration considering the river water runoff for 2018–2020 [8]. 7 Mean concentration for 1995 and 2021 [10].
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Savenko, A.V.; Savenko, V.S. Trace Element Composition of the Dissolved Matter Runoff of the Russian Arctic Rivers. Water 2024, 16, 565. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16040565

AMA Style

Savenko AV, Savenko VS. Trace Element Composition of the Dissolved Matter Runoff of the Russian Arctic Rivers. Water. 2024; 16(4):565. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16040565

Chicago/Turabian Style

Savenko, Alla V., and Vitaly S. Savenko. 2024. "Trace Element Composition of the Dissolved Matter Runoff of the Russian Arctic Rivers" Water 16, no. 4: 565. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16040565

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop