Journal of Geology & Geophysics

Journal of Geology & Geophysics
Open Access

ISSN: 2381-8719

+44 1478 350008

Research Article - (2015) Volume 4, Issue 3

View PDF Download PDF

Assessment of Heavy Metal Contamination in Surface and Ground Water Resources around Udege Mbeki Mining District, North-Central Nigeria

Okegye JI and Gajere JN*
Department of Natural Sciences, Nasarawa State Polytechnic, PMB 109 Lafia, Nasarawa State, Nigeria
*Corresponding Author: Gajere JN, Department of Natural Sciences, Nasarawa State Polytechnic, PMB 109 Lafia, Nasarawa State, Nigeria, Tel: 234-8035985691 Email:

Abstract

The study assessed the surface water and groundwater chemistry with special concern to heavy metal contaminations/pollution in Udege Mbeki mining district. A total of eight mine ponds, eight hands – dog wells, three streams and one adit water samples were analysed for their heavy metals contents. The heavy metal concentrations ranged as follows: Cd (0.000-0.110 mg/L), Cr (0.003-0.146 mg/L), Co (0.110-1.260 mg/L), Cu (0.000-0.260 mg/L), Fe (0.015-8.398 mg/L), Pb (0.0001-1.853 mg/L) and Ni (0.001.112 mg/L). Concentrations of Cr, Cu and Ni are generally within the maximum permissible limit of the WHO (2006) guideline, whereas concentrations of Fe, Co, Pb and Cd are above the maximum permissible limit. The contamination/pollution level was estimated based on the geoaccumulation index (Ige0), enrichment factor (EF) and heavy metal pollution index (HPI). Sources of the heavy metals in the waters of the area are mainly anthropogenic. The heavy metal pollution index (HPI) calculated was 559.12, which is far above the critically pollution index value of 100 and therefore depict that the waters of the area are critically polluted with regards to heavy metals.

Keywords: Heavy metals, Contamination, Enrichment factor, Heavy metal pollution index

Introduction

The T.A.M Company (a colonial company) started mining in the area over sixty (60) years ago. Different locations within the District and minerals being mine/processed are Udege Mbeki (columbite, cassiterite and zircon), Agbalande (cassiterite), and jenta (cassiterite and columbite) Rafin Gabas (cassiterite, sphalerite, galena and wolframite) and Bajari (cassiterite). In 1976, the T.A.M Company transferred the ownership to Vectis Tin Mines limited Jos due to the kind of mining policy introduced by the Nigerian Government. Ever since, the mines and/littered paddocks have been abandoned without major reclamation and/or rehabilitation.

In most mining areas surface water and groundwater are usually contaminated and/or polluted by heavy metals. Sources of the heavy metals in waters can either be natural (geogenic) or anthropogenic [1-3]. Mining and smelting plants are the main anthropogenic sources of heavy metal contaminations in any mining area. The heavy metal contaminations are important due to their potential toxicity for human being and environments [4,5]. Some of the heavy metals such as Cu, Fe, Ni and Zn are essential micronutrients for animals and plants but are dangerous at high levels, whereas Cd, Cr, Pb and Co have no known physiological functions but are detrimental at certain limits [6-10]. Furthermore Cr, Cd and Ni are carcinogenic, while Pb may cause neurological impairment and central nervous system malfunctioning.

This study assessed the surface water and groundwater chemistry with special concern to heavy metal contaminations/pollutions in Udege Mbeki mining District. It also evaluated the drinking and domestic quality of the waters as well as the possible health effects of the heavy metals on human beings in the area.

Physical Setting

The study area (Udege Mbeki Mining District) is located within Kokona and Nasarawa Local Government Area of Nasarawa State, north central Nigeria (Figure 1). It encompasses Udege Mbeki, Dogon Daji, Odu, Omadegye, Odamu, Rafin Gabas, Jenta, Agbalande and Igwo. The area lies within latitudes 080 19, 30” N to 80 30, 12” N and longitudes 7050, E to 8004, E. It covers a total area of about 400 km2. It is accessible through Akwanga-Keffi via Mararaba-Agwada road and other major roads. The area falls within the tropical guinea-savannah and characterized by two seasons, namely: the dry season which lasts from November-March and the rainy season that lasts from April-October [11,12]. The mean annual rainfall is between 1000-1500 mm, while the mean temperature is about 25.60°C [13]. Geologically, the study area is underlain mainly by the Jurassic Younger Granites and Cretaceous sedimentary rocks of the Middle Benue Trough (Figure 1). Common minerals in the area are cassiterite, columbite, wolframite, zircon, topaz, magnetite, beryl, sphalerite, chalcopyrite, ilmenite and galena.

geology-geosciences-Nasarawa-State

Figure 1: Map of Nasarawa State showing the location of the study area (modified after Obaje et al.) [14].

Materials and Methods

Twenty (20) water samples were collected which comprise 8 mine ponds (MNP), 8 handdug wells (HDW), 3 streams (STRM) and 1 adit (ADT). These constitute the main sources of water supply for the inhabitants in and around the Udege Mbeki Mining District. Sampling was done in January 2008 at the peak of dry season to avoid the effect of dilution that may result from precipitation during rainy season.

Water samples were collected in new screwcap, high density polythene bottles (1.5 litres) which were first rinsed two to three times with the water to be sampled and acidified with HNO3 at point of collection. The samples were adequately labelled and were kept at 4°C prior to analysis. Atomic absorption spectrometer (Buck scientific VGP 210 Model) was used for the analysis and the heavy metals for are cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe0), lead (Pb) and nickel (Ni). The analyses were carried out in accordance with the standard procedures specified in APHA and AWWA [15].

Results and Discussions

Heavy metal concentrations

The results of the chemical analysis of both shallow groundwater and surface water in the study area are presented in Table 1, alongside with the Mean Composition of World Rivers (MCWR) [16] and WHO [17] Guideline.

Water Sample Description of location Cd(mg/L) Cr(mg/L) Co(mg/L) Cu(mg/L) Fe(mg/L) Pb(mg/L) Ni(mg/L)
MNP1 Udege Mbeki 0.110 0.022 0.142 0.260 0.293 1.429 0.008
HDW1 Udege Mbeki 0.002 0.146 0.314 0.060 3.3385 0.340 0.002
HDW2 Udege Mbeki 0.011 0.015 0.110 0.010 0.173 0.001 0.022
HDW3 Udege Mbeki 0.000 0.003 1.251 0.080 2.033 0.033 0.020
MNP2 DogonDaji 0.014 0.030 1.061 0.090 0.619 0.008 0.034
MNP3 DogonDaji 0.031 0.056 1.210 0.020 0.399 1.154 0.014
MNP4 Main Paddock 0.056 0.025 0.341 0.100 2.477 1.853 0.007
MNP5 Main Paddock 0.031 0.020 0.621 0.110 1.182 0.031 0.024
HDW4 Odu 0.051 0.044 0.814 0.140 2.493 1.296 0.020
HDW5 Odu 0.022 0.034 1.260 0.050 1.592 1.495 0.020
HDW6 Odu 0.011 0.017 0.211 0.000 6.569 0.75 0.010
HDW7 Odu 0.067 0.029 0.341 0.110 1.441 0.117 0.009
MNP6 Omadegye 0.034 0.025 0.902 0.170 1.398 0.765 0.014
ADT1 Odamu 0.031 0.021 0.164 0.190 0.842 0.976 0.024
STRM1 RafinGabas 0.024 0.020 0.231 0.050 1.567 0.009 0.055
STRM2 Bajari 0.019 0.016 0.160 0.050 1.027 0.032 0.015
HDW8 Jenta 0.026 0.006 1.201 0.100 0.015 0.032 0.025
MNP7 Agbalande 0.0021 0.028 1.251 0.070 0.893 0.196 0.001
MNP8 Agbalande 0.016 0.29 0.304 0.180 0.422 0.383 0.112
STRM3 Igwo 0.012 0.003 0.681 0.040 0.063 0.032 0.020
  Minimum 0.000 0.003 0.110 0.000 0.015 0.001 0.001
Maximum 0.110 0.146 1.260 0.260 8.398 0.853 0.112
Mean 0.030 0.0425 0.63 0.043 1.942 0.512 0.022
World River Mean (MCWR) 0.0001 0.001 0.0002 0.007 0.500 0.003 0.0003
             
WHO (2006) Guideline 0.003 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.3 0.01 0.02

Table 1: Result of chemical analysis of the waters in the study area. MNP: Mine; HDW: Hand-dug well; ADIT: Adit; STRM: Stream

Concentrations of the heavy metals including Fe, in the water of the area are shown in Figure 2 The ranges of the heavy metal concentration in mg/L are as follow: Cd (0.0000.110), Cr (0.0030. 146), Co (0.1101.260), Cu (0.0000.260), Fe (0.0158.398), Pb (0.00011.853) and Ni (0.0010.112). Mean concentration of Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Fu, Pb and Ni are 0.030, 0.0425, 0.63, 0.043, 1.942, 0.512 and 0.22mg/L. Mean concentrations of Cd, Cr, Cu and Ni are more than 100 times that of the MCWR, whereas mean concentrations of Co, Fe, and Pb are greater than 1000 times that of MCWR. Therefore, the mean (average) concentration is in the order: Fe>Co>Pb>Cu>Cr>Cd>Ni (Figure 2).

geology-geosciences-metal-concentration

Figure 2: Heavy metal concentration in the samples of the study area.

Drinking and domestic water quality

The drinking and domestic water quality criteria for this study are based on world Health organisation (WHO) [17] Guideline for drinking water. The concentrations of Cr, Cu and Ni are generally within the maximum permissible limit (Table 2). Thus, most of the heavy metal concentrations in the waters of the area are above the WHO [17] Guideline for drinking water and thus poses a quality problem. They are unfit for drinking, domestic and agricultural use. The possible health effects of these heavy metals in humans and animals are also presented in Table 2. These effects will get to human and animal systems via water intake/uptake.

Heavy metals WHO (2006) Guideline Waters from the study area
Desirable Limit Permissible Limit Range Mean Evaluation for drinking and/possible health effects.
Cd (mg/L) <0.01 <0.01 0.0-0.110 0.030 Very high. May be carcinogenic; May cause kidney damage, lung cancer, ostemalcia or osteoporosis, anaemia, teeth discolouration.
Cr (mg/L) <0.05 <0.1 0.003-0.146 0.030 High to good. May be carcinogenic; May cause kidney damage, convulsions, dermatitis and diathasis.
Co (mg/L)   <0.1 0.110-1.260 0.63 Very high. May cause vomiting, dermatitis, asthma, skin rashes, vision and heart problem.
Cu (mg/L) <0.05 <1.0 0.0-0.260 0.043 Excellent to good
Fe (mg/L) <0.1 <1.0 0.015-8.398 1.942 High to good. May cause conjunctivitis, stains and taste.
Pb (mg/L) <0.020 <0.050 0.001-1.853 0.512 Very high. May cause kidney damage, anorexia, encephalopathy (brain swelling), dizziness, digestive disorder, lung cancer, coma and death.
Ni (mg/L)   <0.02 0.001-0.112 0.022 High to good. May be carcinogenic; May cause allergies and skin problem.

Table 2:Evaluation of heavy metals in waters of the study area for drinking/domestic purposes and possible health effects (Modified after WHO, Holding, Lsevirsion) [17-19].

Assessment of metal contamination

In order to assess the heavy metal contamination in the shallow groundwater and surface water in the study area. Three quantitative indices namely: Geoaccumulation index [Igeo], Enrichment factor [EF] and Heavy metal pollution index [HPI] were utilised.

Index of geoaccumulation (Igeo)

Index of geoaccumulation (Igeo) as introduced by Muller [20] has been extensively used to assess the degree of metal contamination in terrestrial aquatic and marine environments [21-24]. It is expressed as; Igeo= Log2[(Cn)]/(1.5Bn)]. Where, Cn is the concentration of the element in the enriched water sample and Bn is the background concentration of element either taken from the literature (average crustal abundance) or directly determined from a geologically similar area. The factor 1.5 is used to address possible variations in the background concentration due to lithologic differences [25]. For this study the respective values of MCWR [16] were used as background concentrations for the water (Table 1). Muller [20] proposed seven descriptive classes of geoaccumulation index (Table 3).

Class I geo Value Quality
0 I geo  ≤ 0 Uncontaminated
1 0 Uncontaminated to moderately contaminated
2 1 Moderately contaminated
3 2 Moderately to heavily contaminated
4 3 Heavily contaminated
5 4 Heavily to extremely contaminated
6 5 Extremely contaminated

Table 3: Geoaccumulation Index (Igeo) according to Muller (1969).

The computed values of the geoaccummulation index (Igeo) of the heavy metals in the waters of the study area are presented in Table 4.

Water
Sample		 Cd Cr Co Cu Fe Pb Ni
MNP1 9.57 3.87 8.89 4.63 -1.36 8.31 4.15
HDW1 3.74 6.61 10.03 2.52 2.15 6.24 2.15
HDW2 6.20 3.32 8.52 -0.07 -2.12 -2.17 5.61
HDW3 0 1.00 12.03 2.93 1.44 2.87 5.47
MNP2 6.54 4.32 11.79 3.10 -0.28 0.83 6.24
MNP3 7.69 5.22 11.98 0.93 -0.91 8.00 4.96
MNP4 8.54 4.06 10.15 3.25 1.72 8.69 3.96
MNP5 7.69 3.74 11.02 3.39 0.66 2.78 5.74
HDW4 8.41 4.87 11.41 3.74 1.73 8.17 5.47
HDW5 7.20 4.50 12.04 2.25 1.09 8.38 5.47
HDW6 6.20 3.50 9.46 0 3.13 4.06 4.47
HDW7 8.80 4.27 10.15 3.39 0.94 4.70 4.32
MNP6 7.83 4.06 11.56 4.02 3.49 7.41 4.96
ADT1 7.69 3.81 9.10 4.18 0.17 7.76 5.74
STRM1 7.32 3.74 9.59 2.25 1.06 1.00 6.93
STRM2 6.99 3.42 8.60 2.25 0.45 2.83 5.06
HDW8 7.44 2.00 11.97 3.25 -5.64 2.83 5.80
MNP7 3.81 4.22 12.03 2.74 0.25 5.45 1.15
MNP8 6.74 7.60 9.99 4.10 -0.83 6.41 7.96
STRM3 6.32 1.00 11.15 1.93 2.03 2.83 5.47
Range 0-9.57 1-7.60 8.52-12.04 -0.07-4.63 -5.64-3.49 -2.17-8.69 1.15-6.93
Mean 6.74 3.96 10.57 2.74 0.46 4.87 5.05

Table 4: Geoaccumulation index of heavy metals in waters of the study area.

Average Igeo values are 6.74, 3.96, 10.57, 2.74, 0.46, 4.46, 4.87 and 5.05 for Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe, Pb and Ni, respectively. Therefore, the degree of heavy metal contamination in the waters using geoaccumulation index (Igeo) is in the order: Co>Cd>Pb>Ni>Cr>Cu>Fe (Figure 3). The average Igeo values of 10.57, 6.74 and 5.05, for Co, Cd and Ni, respectively indicate that the waters of the area are extremely contaminated (Table 5). Also Pb and Cr have average Igeo values of 4.87 and 3.96, respectively; therefore depicting heavily to extremely contaminated waters, whereas Cu and Fe have average Igeo values of 2.74 and 0.46, respectively; thus, indicating moderately to heavily contaminated water and uncontaminated to moderately contaminated water, respectively.

geology-geosciences-computed-geoaccumulation

Figure 3: Profiles of the computed geoaccumulation index (Igeo) in the waters of the study area.

Metals Igeo value Overall heavy metal contamination level in the waters
Range Mean
Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
Fe
Pb
Ni		 0-9.57
1-7.60
8.52-12.04
-0.07-4.63
-5.64-3.49
-2.17-8.69
1.15-6.93		 6.74
3.96
10.57
2.74
0.46
4.87
5.05		 Extremely contaminate
Heavily contaminated
Extremely contaminated
Moderately to heavily contaminated
Uncontaminated to moderately contaminated
Heavily to extremely contaminated
Extremely contaminated

Table 5: Summary of geoaccumulation index (Igeo) with regards to heavy metal contamination in waters of the study area

The relatively high Igeo values for Cd, Co, Pb, Ni, Cu and Cr in the waters could be due the mining and mineral processing activities as well as weathering of natural mineral deposits in the area.

Enrichment factor (EF)

Enrichment factor (EF) is popularly used to determine whether the sources of the metals are geogenic and/or anthropogenic as well as to assess the degree of metal contamination [26-28]. According to Selvaraj et al. [26] EF values from 1 to 10 indicate geogenic sources (natural source), while those greater than 10 indicate anthropogenic sources. Sutherland (2000) suggested five contamination categories of enrichment factor and they are presented on Table 6.

EF Value Quality
<2 Minimal enrichment
2-5 Moderate enrichment
5-20 Significant enrichment
20-40 Very highly enriched
>40 Extremely highly enriched

Table 6: Enrichment factor according to Sutherland [22].

The enrichment factor (EF) originally proposed by Buat- Menard and Chesselet [29] was employed to assess the metal enrichment in the water of the study area. It is expressed as:

EF= [(Cn/Cref)sample]/(Bn/Bref), where Cn(sample) is the content of the examined element, Cref(sample) is the content of the reference element, Bn is the background value of the examined element and Bref(sample) is the background value of the reference element. For this study, Fe was used as the reference element at MCWR value of 0.5mg/L [16]. The computed values of the enrichment factor (EF) of the heavy metals in the waters of the study area are presented on Table 7, while their profiles are shown in Figure 4. The computed enrichment factor (EF) values depict that the trends of metal enrichment in the waters of the area varies from one location to another.

Water Sample Cd Cr Co Cu Pb Ni
MNP1 1877.13 37.54 1211.60 63.38 812.86 45.51
HDW1 3.00 21.87 235.14 1.28 16.97 1.00
HDW2 317.92 43.35 1589.60 4.13 0.96 211.95
HDW3 0.00 0.74 1538.37 2.81 2.71 16.40
MNP2 113.09 24.23 4285.14 10.39 2.15 91.55
MNP3 388.47 70.18 7581.45 3.58 482.04 58.48
MNP4 113.04 5.05 344.17 2.88 124.68 4.71
MNP5 131.13 8.46 1313.45 6.65 4.37 33.84
HDW4 102.29 8.83 816.29 4.01 86.64 13.37
HDW5 69.10 10.68 1978.64 2.24 156.51 20.94
HDW6 8.37 1.29 80.30 0 1.90 2.54
HDW7 232.48 10.06 591.60 5.45 13.53 10.41
MNP6 20.24 1.49 268.52 1.45 15.81 2.78
ADT1 184.09 12.47 486.94 16.12 193.19 47.51
STRM1 76.58 6.38 368.54 2.28 0.96 58.50
STRM2 92.50 7.79 282.38 3.48 5.19 24.34
HDW8 8666.67 200.0 200166.67 476.19 155.56 2777.78
MNP7 11.76 15.68 3502.24 5.60 36.58 1.87
MNP8 189.57 343.60 1800.95 30.47 151.26 442.43
STRM3 19.59 0.49 555.83 0.93 1.74 10.88
Mean 630.85 41.51 11449.89 32.17 123.07 193.84

Table 7: Enrichment factor in waters of the study area.

geology-geosciences-enrichment-factor

Figure 4: Profiles of the computed enrichment factor (EF) in the waters of the study area. EF values greater than 10 are indicative of anthropogenic sources.

Average values of Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Pb and Ni are 630.85, 41.51, 11449.89, 32.17, 123.07 and 193.84, respectively (Table 7). The higher average values for Co, Cd, Ni and Pb indicate that the waters are highly enriched with these heavy metals compared to Cr and Cu (Figure 5). Therefore the mean values of the metal enrichment in the waters of the area are in the order: Co>Cd>Ni>Pb>Cr>Cu (Figure 5). Generally, using Sutherland (200) contamination categories of enrichment factor (Table 6), the waters of the study area are extremely highly enriched with Co, Cd, Ni, Pb and Cr, and highly enriched with Cu.

geology-geosciences-study-area

Figure 5: Profile of the mean value of enrichment factor (EF) in the waters of the study area.

The heavy metal enrichment in water samples MNPI and HDW8 show extreme high enrichment with Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Pb and Ni (Table 7). The EF values with regards to cobalt (Co) in all the waters are greater than 40 and thus, depicts that they are extremely highly enrich in Co. The waters are also extremely highly enriched in Cd with exception of samples HDW1, HDW3, HDW6, MNP6, MNP7 and STRM3 which have minimal to significant enrichment.

Generally, the sources of these heavy metals in the waters of the study area anthropogenic since most of the computed enrichment factor (EF) values are greater than 10. Quantification of the overall heavy metal contamination in the waters shows that 100% of Co, 85% of Cd, 75% of Ni, 60% of Pb, 55% of Cr and 25% of Cu are derived from anthropogenic sources of the metals (especially Co, Cd, Pb, Ni and Cr) in the waters could be attributed to the mining and processing of cassiterite, columbite and other related or associated mineral deposits as well as lead gasoline, lubricating oil and corrosion of mining equipment around the study area.

Heavy metal pollution index (HPI)

Heavy metal pollution index (HPI) is a method of rating that shows the composite influence of individual heavy metal on the overall quality of water. It is a very useful tool in evaluating overall pollution of water bodies with respect to heavy metals [30]. It is usually computed using the formulae: HPI = ∑(wioi )/∑wi. Where, wi is the unit weight age for ith parameter, Qi is the subindex of ith parameter. The subindex (Qi) is given as baseline value of ith parameter and Si is the standard or permissible limit of ith parameter. Generally, the critical pollution index value is 100 [30-32].

The parameters utilised to calculate the HPI as well as the calculated value of HPI in the waters of the study area are presented in Table 8.

Heavy Metals (mg/L) Mean Value (Mi) Standard Value (Si) WHO 2006 Baseline Value (Ii) Unit Weightage (Wi) Subindex (Qi) Wi Qi
Cd 0.030 0.003 0.0001 333.33 195.92 65306.01
Cr 0.0425 0.05 0.001 20.00 16.95 339.00
Co 0.63 0.01 0.0002 100.00 1277.75 127775.00
Cu 0.043 1.00 0.007 1.00 1.69 1.69
Fe 1.942 0.30 0.500 3.33 144.18 480.12
Pb 0.512 0.01 0.003 100.00 1456.71 145671.00
Ni 0.022 0.02 0.0003 50.00 22.85 1142.50

Table 8: Heavy metal pollution index (HPI) calculation for the waters of the study area.

∑Wi=607.66; ∑ (Wi Oi)=339755.08: HPI=559.12

The heavy metal pollution index (HPI) calculated with the mean value of all the seven heavy metals is 559.12, which is above the critical pollution index value of 100. Therefore depicts that the waters of the study area are critically polluted with regards to heavy metal contents.

Conclusions

Results of this study revealed that most of the heavy metal concentration in the waters of the area are higher than the WHO (2006) Guideline for drinking water and thus pose a quality problem. The mean concentration of the heavy metals in the order: Fe>Co>Pb>Cu>Cr>Cd>Ni. The geoaccumulation index (Igeo) and enrichment factor (EF) show that the waters are moderately to extremely contaminated, and moderately to extremely highly enrich with heavy metals; whereas the heavy metal pollution index (PHI) indicates that the waters are critically polluted. Sources of the heavy metals in the waters are primarily anthropogenic and could be attributed to the mining and processing activities in the area.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to two anonymous reviewers for their useful suggestiong and criticisms.

References

  1. Wong CSC, Li XD, Zhang G, Qi SH, Peng XZ (2003) Atmospheric deposition of heavy metals in the Pearl River Delta, China. Atmos Environ 37: 767-776.
  2. Adaikpoh EO, Nwajei G, Ogala JE (2005) Heavy metals concentrations in coal and sediments from river Ekulu in Enugu, City of Nigeria. Les Editions J ApplSci Environ Manag 9: 5-8.
  3. Akoto O, Bruce TN, Darko G (2008) Heavy metals pollution profiles in streams serving the Owabi reservoir. African J Environ Sci Tech 2: 354-359.
  4. Lee CL, Li XD, Zhang G, Li J, Ding AJ, et al. (2007) Heavy metals and Pb isotopic composition of aerosols in urban and suburban areas of Hong Kong and Guangzhou, South china. Evidence of the long-range transport of air contaminants. Environ Pollut 41: 432-447.
  5. Vinodhini R, Narayanan M (2008) Bioaccumulation of heavy metals in organs of fresh water fish Cyprinuscarpio (Common carp). Int J Environ Sci Tech 5: 179-182.
  6. Nadal M, Schuhmacher M, Domingo JL (2004) Metal pollution of soils and vegetation in an area with petrochemical industry. Sci Total Environ 321: 59-69.
  7. An YJ (2006) Assessment of comparative toxicities of lead and copper using plant assay. Chemosphere 62: 1359-1365.
  8. Ochieng EZ, Lalah JO, Wandiga SO (2007) Analysis of heavy metals in water and surface sediment in five Rift Valley lakes in Kenya for assessment of recent increase in anthropogenic activities. Bull Environ ContamToxicol 79: 570-576.
  9. Kar D, Sur P, Mandal SK, Saha T, Kole RK (2008) Assessment of heavymetal pollution in surface water. Int Environ sci Tech 5: 119-124.
  10. Aktar MW, Paramasivam M, Ganguly M, Purkait S, Sengupta D (2010) Assessment and occurrence of various heavy metals in surface water of Ganga river around Kolkata: a study for toxicity and ecological impact. Environ Monitor Assess 160: 207-213.
  11. Adefolalu JO (2002) Climate In: Africa Atlases, Atlas of Nigeria. Les Editions Aux JA Edition du Jaguar 57 bis, rue d, Auteuil-75016 Paris-France.
  12. Olorode O (2002) Vegetation and Fauna. In: Africa Atlases; Atlas of Nigeria. Les Editions J. A. Aux E’dition du Jaguar 57 bis, rue d’Auteuil-75016 Paris-France.
  13. Akintola JO (1986) Rain distribution in Nigeria: 1892-1983. Impact publishers Nigeria limited, Ibadan, Nigeria, 371p.
  14. Obaje N, Moumouni A, Chaanda M, Goki N, Nghargbu K (2007) A manual on the mineral resources of Nasarawa State: Development option and investment opportunities.
  15. APHA, AWWA (1998) Standard methods for Examination of water and Wastewater. (20thedn.), American public Association, Washington, DC.
  16. Hem JD (1985) Study and Interpretation of the chemical characteristics of natural Water. USGS Water supply paper 2254, (3rdedn.), 263p.
  17. WHO (2006) World Health Organization Guidelines for drinking water. (3rdedn.) World Health Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy, 1:68.
  18. Levinson AA (1980) Introduction to Exploration Geochemistry. (2ndedn.) Applied Publisher Ltd, WilmetteneIllnois, 314p.
  19. Muller G (1969) Index of geoaccomulation in sediments of the Phine River. Geol Jour 2:108-118.
  20. Singh M, Ansari AA, Muller G, Singh IB (1997) Heavy metals in freshly deposited sediments of the Gomati River (a tributary of the Ganga River): Effects of human activities. Environ Geol 29: 247-252.
  21. Sutherland RA (2000) Bed sediment-associated trace metals in an urban stream, Oahu, Hawaii. Environ Geol 39: 611-626.
  22. Manjunathan BR, Balakrishna K, Shankar R, Mahalingam TR (2001) Geochemistry and assessment of metal pollution in soils and river components of a Monsoon dominated environment near Karwar. Southwest coast of India. Environmental Geology 40: 1462-1470.
  23. Tijani MN, Jinno K, Hiroshiro Y (2004) Environmental impact of heavy metals distribution in water and sediments of Ogunpa River, Ibadan area, Southwestern Nigeria. Jr of Mining and Geology 40: 73-83.
  24. Stoffers P, Glasby GP, Wilson CJ, Davis KR, Watter P (1986) Heavy metal pollution in Wellington harbour. NZJ Mar Freshwater Res 20: 495-512.
  25. Selvaraj K, Ram Mohan V, Szefer P (2004) Evaluation of metal contamination in coastal sediments of the Bay of Bengal, India: geochemical and statistical approaches. Mar Pollut Bull 49: 174-185.
  26. Olivares-Rieumont S, de la Rosa D, Lima L, Graham DW, D' Alessandro K, et al. (2005) Assessment of heavy metal levels in Almendares River sediments--Havana City, Cuba. Water Res 39: 3945-3953.
  27. Yongming H, Peixuan D, Junji C, Posmentier ES (2006) Multivariate analysis of heavy metal contamination in urban dusts of Xi'an, Central China. Sci Total Environ 355: 176-186.
  28. Buat-Menard P, Chesselet R (1979) Variable influence of the atmosphere flux on the trace metal chemistry of oeceanic suspended matter. Earth Planet sciLett 42: 398-411.
  29. Prasad B, Kumari S (2008) Heavy metal pollution index of ground water of an abandoned open cast mine filled with fly ash: A case study. Mine Water Environ 27: 265-267.
  30. Mohan SV, Nithila P, Reddy SJ (1996) Estimation of heavy metal in drinking water and development of heavy metal pollution index. J Environ Sci Health A, 31: 283-289.
  31. Prasad B, Mondal KK (2008) The impact of filling an abandoned opencast mine with fly ash on ground quality: A case study. Mine Water Environ 27: 40-45.
Citation: Okegye JI, Gajere JN (2015) Assessment of Heavy Metal Contamination in Surface and Ground Water Resources around Udege Mbeki Mining District, North-Central Nigeria. J Geol Geophys 4:203.

Copyright: © 2015 Gajere JN. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Top