We are IntechOpen,

the world’s leading publisher of

Open Access books
Built by scientists, for scientists

4,700
Open access books available
120,000
International authors and editors
135M
Downloads

Our authors are among the

154
Countries delivered to
TOP 1%
most cited scientists
12.2%
Contributors from top 500 universities

Selection of our books indexed in the Book Citation Index

in Web of Science™ Core Collection (BKCI)

Interested in publishing with us?

Contact book.department@intechopen.com
Numbers displayed above are based on latest data collected.
For more information visit www.intechopen.com
Chapter

Heavy Metal Contamination and

Remediation of Water and Soil
with Case Studies From Cyprus
Mustafa Ertan Akün

Abstract

Some of the heavy metals, (arsenic, cadmium, chromium and nickel) tend to
endanger public health, when found above critical limits in soil and water, becom-
ing carcinogenic. The heavy metals are taken by humans through the food chain. As
shown by numerous researchers all over the world, the heavy metal contamination
mostly come from sewage waters and pesticides, as well as naturally. The natural
resources come from the composition of the rock formations present at the area
of study. One or all of the above mentioned sources of heavy metal contamination
may be present. The study concentrates on the internationally accepted critical
limits for soil and water, explains scientific methods of entering into vegetables and
fruit, and also tries to shed light on the transfer factors of heavy metals imposing
dangers on public health. Remediation of the contaminated soil and water is also
discussed, and phytoremediation methods are brought forward, as compared with
chemical methods. Details of different phytoremediation (phyto-accumulation,
phyto-stabilization, phyto-degradation, phyto-volatilization, and hydraulic con-
trol) are also discussed. Actual case studies from North Cyprus are also provided,
with real contamination levels observed. Different areas and soil/water/plant
species were assessed in detail, displaying concentrations, critical limits, transfer
factors, and recommendations.

Keywords: heavy metal, contamination, soil, water, critical limit, public health

1. Introduction

Public health necessitates concentrated efforts of researchers and public

authorities and will be under risk if necessary and timely precautions are not
undertaken. Soil and groundwaters are inputs for vegetables and fruits and
thus animals and mankind as a whole. Sometimes, the sources of heavy metal
contamination could as well be airborne. In certain cases, biomonitoring of
airborne heavy metal contamination has been an important issue and has been
carried out worldwide. Accordingly, during the last few decades, heavy metal
contamination of biotic component of environment has attracted the attention
of researchers. In this respect, biological materials were used as cheap indicators
to determine airborne environmental pollution. Various types of plants (such as
lichens, mosses, bark, and leaves of higher plants) were used to detect deposi-
tion, accumulation, and distribution of metal pollution and their accumulative
potential [1].

1
Heavy Metal Toxicity in Public Health

Not only are the heavy metals carcinogenic, but many other diseases such as
lung, liver, kidney, and similar diseases are also potential occurrences. Arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, and nickel are accepted as group 1 carcinogens by the
International Agency for Research on Cancer, and these heavy metals are at
the same time utilized commercially [2]. Some other heavy metals are also
carcinogenic in nature, and a relevant study listed cobalt, lead, and mercury in
addition [3].
Although some of the heavy metals are known to be enhancing the immune
system, the same heavy metals above critical limits and some others are hazard-
ous heavy metals for human beings. The critical limits of heavy metals in soil and
water are not only different, but they also differ from country to country. Although
natural occurrences in different countries and the methods for contamination are
the background reasons for this, it is at the same time dependent on the policy mak-
ers. Apart from the countries’ legislations, some international organizations like the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) also announce and revise these limits periodically. Table 1 shows critical
limits for soils for different countries.
Critical limits of the EPA for water are given below in Table 2. The table explains
maximum allowable contaminant levels for a wide range of chemicals, either
carcinogen or resulting in different health problems.
Numerous researches arrived at scientific findings about the carcinogenic nature
of some of the heavy metals and elements. Although not definite and including
probability of being a carcinogen, studies reveal the imposed dangers involved,
hinting precautions to be taken. Accordingly, the EPA has prepared specific results
and cancer descriptors with relevant definitions. Table 3 below explains cancer
descriptors for certain elements.
The heavy metals and carcinogen elements enter the human body via the food
chain. The food chain is the mechanism showing the route of heavy metals from
soils and waters finally reaching plants, animals, and humans. Figure 1 shows the
journey of heavy metals via food chain.
Thus, public health necessitates to minimize the intake of hazardous heavy
metals and elements and if possible to null the amounts. To render this possible, the
methodologies by which these metals and elements enter the food chain must be
understood correctly, and relevant precautions must be taken.

Country As Cd Cr Cu Hg Ni Pb Zn
Australia 20 3 50 100 1 60 300 200

Canada 20 3 250 150 0.8 100 200 500

China 20–40 0.3–0.6 150–300 50–200 0.3–1.0 40–60 80 200–300

Germany 50 5 500 200 5 200 1000 600

Tanzania 1 1 100 200 2 100 200 150

Holland 76 13 180 190 36 100 530 720

NZ 17 3 290 >104 200 N/A 160 N/A

UK 43 1.8 N/A N/A 26 230 N/A N/A

USA 0.11 0.48 11 270 1 72 200 1100

Source: [4].

Table 1.
Regulatory standard of heavy metals in agricultural soil (mg/kg).

2
Heavy Metal Contamination and Remediation of Water and Soil with Case Studies From Cyprus
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90060

Chemicals Maximum contaminant level (mg/L) Cancer descriptor

Ammonia — D
Antimony 0.006 D
Arsenic 010 A
Asbestos 7 MFL A
Barium 2 N
Beryllium 0.004 —
Boron — I
Bromate 0.01 B2
Cadmium 0.005 D
4
Chloramine3 4 —
4
Chlorine 4 D
Chlorine dioxide 0.84 D
Chlorite 1 D
Chromium 0.1 D
6
Copper TT D
Cyanide 0.2 I
Fluoride 4 —
6
Lead TT B2
Manganese — D
Mercury 0.002 D
Molybdenum — D
Nickel — —
Nitrate 10 —
Nitrite 1 —
Nitrate + Nitrite 10 —
Perchlorate2 — L/N
Selenium 0.05 D
Silver — D
Strontium — D
Thallium 0.002 I
White phosphorous — D
Zinc —
Source: [5].

Table 2.
Standards of heavy metals in water and health advisories.

Descriptor Definition

A Human carcinogen

B Probable human carcinogen

B1 Indicates limited human evidence

B2 Indicates sufficient evidence in animals and inadequate or no evidence in humans

C Possible human carcinogen

3
Heavy Metal Toxicity in Public Health

Descriptor Definition

D Not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity

E Evidence of non-carcinogenicity for humans

H Carcinogenic to humans

I Inadequate information to assess carcinogenic potential

L Likely to be carcinogenic to humans

N Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans

L/N Likely to be carcinogenic above a specified dose but not likely to be carcinogenic below
that dose because a key event in tumor formation does not occur below that dose

S Suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential

Source: [5].

Table 3.
Cancer descriptors.

Figure 1.
Journey of heavy metals via food chain.

2. Soil and water contamination and remediation/precautions

There are numerous sources of heavy metal contamination of soils and water.
These are briefly explained below:

a. Sewage waters: This is an anthropogenic activity. The sewage waters are those
collected via municipal, agricultural, and industrial origin [6]. The potential
heavy metal inclusions from these sources are normally collected at treatment
plants. Treatment results are never theoretically 100% efficient, and following
the treatment process, disposed water is mostly utilized in irrigation of agri-
cultural areas. The irrigation process then transfers the heavy metal content to
soils and groundwaters.

b. Pesticides: This is an anthropogenic activity. Many plants (vegetables, fruits,

and trees) are under the attack of certain pests and are not only decreasing
the quality of the products but also contaminating them with heavy met-
als, due to the presence of such. The research carried out on the heavy metal

4
Heavy Metal Contamination and Remediation of Water and Soil with Case Studies From Cyprus
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90060

levels of spinach [7] following the application of pesticides (DELVAP 1000

EC) displayed that the concentrations before and after the pesticide applica-
tion changed significantly. The application of pesticides also contaminates
the soil in the surrounding, and the included heavy metals may also reach the
groundwaters.

c. Natural resources: This is a natural activity. Many elements and heavy metals
can be naturally present in the surrounding, and erosion of these rock forma-
tions including such elements and heavy metals can be transformed into soil.
Downward percolation of rain waters may as well result in the arrival of such
to groundwaters. A related research forwards that under different and certain
environmental conditions, natural emissions of heavy metals occur that may
in turn lead to the release of metals from their endemic spheres to different
environment compartments [8].

2.1 Types of remediation

The remediation methodologies can be chemical or biological in nature. Since

heavy metal contamination itself is a chemical process, chemical remediation
should be avoided, and biological processes should be introduced. The phytoreme-
diation of heavy metals from the contaminated sites generally happens through any
one or more of the following mechanisms or processes [9]: “phyto-accumulation,”
“phyto-stabilization,” “phyto-degradation,” “phyto-volatilization,” and “hydraulic
control.”

2.1.1 Phyto-accumulation

Phyto-accumulation is a mechanism through which heavy metals in soil and

water at a specific region are accumulated in native plants and are disposed
thereafter. In a research carried out in Pakistan [10], heavy metal accumula-
tion in crops and soils from wastewater irrigation was realized via the usage
of Cannabis sativa L., Chenopodium album L., Datura stramonium L., Sonchus
asper L., Amaranthus viridis L., Oenothera rosea (LHer), Xanthium stramonium
L., Polygonum macalosa L., Nasturtium officinale L., and Conyza canadensis
L. Metal concentrations are in the order iron (Fe) > zinc (Zn) > chromium
(Cr) > nickel (Ni) > cadmium (Cd). Most of the species accumulated more heavy
metals in roots than shoots. Among species, the concentrations were in the order
C. sativa > C. album > X. stramonium > C. canadensis > A. viridis > N. offici-
nale > P. macalosa > D. stramonium > S. asper > O. rosea.
In this mechanism, bio-concentration factor (BCF) and biological absorption
coefficient (BAC) are also important parameters to be considered. According to the
international guidelines, “bioaccumulation” is the process where chemical con-
centration in an aquatic organism reaches a level that exceeds that in the water as a
result of chemical uptake through all routes of chemical exposure. Bioaccumulation
takes place under field conditions and is a combination of chemical bio-concentra-
tion and biomagnification.
On the other hand, metal accumulation is expressed by the metal biological
absorption coefficient (BAC) or the plant-to-soil/water metal concentration ratio.
Bio-concentration factors are used to relate pollutant residues in aquatic organisms
to the pollutant concentration in ambient waters. Many chemical compounds,
especially those with a hydrophobic component, partition easily into the lipids and
lipid membranes of organisms and bioaccumulate.

5
Heavy Metal Toxicity in Public Health

BCF and BAC are described by the following formulas:

BCF = CB / CWD = k1 / (k2 + kE + kM + kG) (1)

BAC = CB / CWD = {k1 + kD (CB / CWD)} / (k2 + kE + kM + kG) (2)

where CB is the chemical concentration in the organism (g/kg−1), k1 is the

chemical uptake rate constant from the water at the respiratory surface (L·kg−1·d−1),
CWD is the freely dissolved chemical concentration in the water (g·L−1), kD is the
uptake rate constant for chemical in the diet (kg × kg−1 × d−1), and k2, kE, kM, and
kG are rate constants (d−1) representing chemical elimination from the organism
via the respiratory surface, fecal egestion, metabolic biotransformation, and growth
dilution, respectively.
Phyto-accumulation for arsenic was adopted in India and Bangladesh by utiliz-
ing two different plant species, namely, Pteris vittata and Chrysopogon zizanioides.
Laboratory scale studies gave way to observations regarding growth of these plants
in different concentrations of 10–50 mg As/kg soil. Arsenic accumulation in leaves,
stem, and root were analyzed at different time intervals, observing survival of
plants. Results were encouraging, and it was observed that they could accumulate
significant amounts of arsenic [11].

2.1.2 Phyto-stabilization

Phyto-stabilization comprises the establishment of a plant cover on the surface

of the contaminated sites for reducing the mobility of contaminants within the
vadose zone via accumulation by roots or immobilization within the rhizosphere,
reducing off-site contamination [12]. The process includes transpiration and root
growth that immobilizes contaminants by reducing leaching, controlling erosion,
creating an aerobic environment in the root zone, and adding organic matter to the
substrate that binds the contaminant.
Microbial activity related with the plant roots may accelerate the degradation
of organic contaminants such as pesticides and hydrocarbons to nontoxic forms.
Phyto-stabilization can be enhanced by using soil amendments that immobilize
metal(loid)s combined with plant species that are tolerant of high levels of con-
taminants and low-fertility soils or tailings. Although effective in the containment
of metal(loid)s, the site requires regular monitoring to ensure that the stabilizing
conditions are maintained. Soil amendments used to enhance immobilization may
need to be periodically reapplied to maintain their effectiveness.

2.1.3 Phyto-degradation

Phyto-degradation, which is also known as phyto-transformation, is the break-

down of contaminants taken up by plants through metabolic processes within the
plant or the breakdown of contaminants surrounding the plant through the effect of
enzymes produced by the plants. Plants are able to produce enzymes that catalyze
and accelerate degradation. Hence, organic pollutants are broken down into simpler
molecular forms and are incorporated into plant tissues to aid plant growth.
Figure 2 shows the degradation process. Enzymes in plant roots break down
(degrade) organic contaminants. The fragments are incorporated into new plant
material.
A relevant research [13] put forth that the phyto-degradation of organic com-
pounds can take place inside the plant or within the rhizosphere of the plant. Many

6
Heavy Metal Contamination and Remediation of Water and Soil with Case Studies From Cyprus
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90060

Figure 2.
Degradation process.

different compounds and compound classes can be removed from the environment
by phyto-degradation, including solvents in groundwater, petroleum and aromatic
compounds in soils, and volatile compounds in the air. Although currently a rela-
tively new area of research, studies regarding the underlying science necessary for a
wide range of applications for plant-based remediation of organic contaminants are
continuing.

2.1.4 Phyto-volatilization

Phyto-volatilization is a process where plants take up contaminants from soil

and release them as volatile form into the atmosphere via transpiration. The process
occurs as growing plants absorb water and organic contaminants.
It is possible for plants to interact with a variety of organic compounds and
affect the fate and transport of many environmental contaminants. Volatile organic
compounds may be volatilized from stems or leaves (direct phyto-volatilization)
or from soil due to plant root activities (indirect phyto-volatilization) [14]. Fluxes
of contaminants volatilizing from plants range from local contaminant spills to
global fluxes of methane emanating biochemically reducing organic carbon. In this
article past studies are reviewed to differentiate between direct and indirect phyto-
volatilization. Findings of the study revealed that compounds with low octanol-air
partitioning coefficients are more likely to be phyto-volatilized. Reports of direct
phyto-volatilization compared favorably to model predictions. Figure 3 represents
direct and indirect phyto-volatilization.

Figure 3.
Direct and indirect phyto-volatilization.

7
Heavy Metal Toxicity in Public Health

2.1.5 Hydraulic control

Hydraulic control is the method of phytoremediation, where the contaminated

aqueous medium’s flow direction is altered and contaminated flow is oriented. The
relevant research study [15] designed such a system at the field.
The goal of this hydraulic capture model for remediation purposes was to design
a well field so that the groundwater flow direction was altered. In so doing, halting
or reversing the migration of a contaminant plume was made possible. Management
strategies typically require a well design that will contain or shrink a plume at
minimum cost. Objective functions and constraints can be nonlinear, non-convex,
non-differentiable, or even discontinuous. Computational efficiency and accuracy
is normally desirable and often affects the solution method.

2.2 Precautions against soil and water contamination

The precautions against contamination also differ according to the sources of

contamination.
Accordingly, the precautions according to the sources are provided below:

a. Sewage waters: The municipal sewage waters are those connected from houses
at inhabited areas. Hazardous elements and heavy metals may enter the system
from any location by any liquid or solid. The inhabitants must be trained
about the disposal system at the start point to minimize their entrance into the
system. Frequent analysis of input and output at the treatment plant must be
carried out; methods of minimizing contamination levels must be employed;
and output containing hazardous elements and heavy metals with lower than
critical limits must be used for irrigation purposes. The agricultural sewage
waters are those collected at the farms and greenhouses used for cleaning
purposes. These may from time to time include disposed plant parts, some
soil, and some fertilizers. Thus, probability of presence of hazardous elements
and heavy metals is quite high, and serious precautions are necessary. These
are also entering the treatment plants, and like municipal sewage waters, the
relevant people must again be trained about the disposal system at the start
point to minimize their entrance into the system. Frequent analysis of input
and output at the treatment plant must again be carried out; methods of
minimizing contamination levels must be employed; and output containing
hazardous elements and heavy metals with lower than critical limits must be
used for irrigation purposes. The most dangerous of the types of sewage waters
is definitely industrial sewage waters. This group includes slaughterhouse
waste, whey of milk processing factories, paint factory waste, animal breeding
waste, and similar factory wastes. These also enter treatment plants, and again
frequent input and output sewage analysis is required. The relevant people
must again be trained about the disposal system to minimize their entrance
into the system.

b. Pesticides: Though the application of pesticides is connected with the quality

of the agricultural products, the included heavy metals are in fact decreas-
ing the quality and reliability. In many countries, many pesticide types are
banned in conformance with the technological advancements and informa-
tion regarding heavy metals. A study carried out in Nigeria showed the pres-
ence of heavy metals (Pb, As, Cd, Cr, and Zn) in different parts of the plants
and at different concentrations, with some above the WHO/FAO permissible

8
Heavy Metal Contamination and Remediation of Water and Soil with Case Studies From Cyprus
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90060

limits [16]. At some instances, it may become must to apply the pesticide,
and under such circumstances, the adequate dose must be applied by expert
personnel.

c. Natural resources: Just like the areas polluted by anthropogenic activities, in

case of natural occurrence of heavy metals also, bioremediation can be an
effective precaution. A relevant research titled “Heavy Metal Polluted Soils:
Effect on Plants and Bioremediation Methods” in 2014 applied bioremedia-
tion and analyzed the results [17]. Microorganisms and plants employ different
mechanisms for the bioremediation of polluted soils. Using plants for the
treatment of polluted soils is a more common approach in the bioremediation
of heavy metal polluted soils. Combining both microorganisms and plants is
an approach to bioremediation that ensures a more efficient cleanup of heavy
metal polluted soils. However, success of this approach largely depends on the
species of organisms involved in the process.

3. Case studies of soil and water contamination from Cyprus

3.1 Arsenic, cadmium, and lead distribution of Cyprus soils

Selected locations in Cyprus were investigated by the Cancer Research Fund

and Frederick Institute of Technology in search of distribution of heavy metals.
The collaborative research investigated for lead, arsenic, and cadmium [18]. The
observations of cancer incidents triggered the research all over the island, and the
findings displayed contamination at certain areas. To achieve an analytical distri-
bution, 260 composite soil samples (140 from North Cyprus and 120 from South
Cyprus) were investigated for the presence of heavy metal contamination. The
soil samples were obtained from Güzelyurt Bostancı, Yuvacık, Lefkoşa, Karpaz,
Alevkayası, Kırnı, and Mesarya in North Cyprus. The concentration of lead in
these areas ranged between 8 and 45 ppm, while that of arsenic ranged between 8
and 15 ppm and that of cadmium ranged between 0 and 0.7 ppm. These findings
are given in Table 4.
In South Cyprus, the soil samples were obtained from Dali, Sotira, Omodos,
Acheleia, Polis, and Evrychou. The concentration of lead in these areas ranged
between 6 and 53 ppm, while that of arsenic ranged between 6 and 19 ppm and that
of cadmium ranged between 0 and 0.4 ppm, given below in Table 5.

Area Pb (ppm) As (ppm) Cd (ppm)

Alevkayası 32.58 11.25 0.34

Lefkoşa 44.29 11.87 0.69

Kırnı 40.51 14.63 0.47

Yuvacık 32.42 8.98 0.34

Bostancı 8.02 9.47 0.2

Mesarya 12.6 11.09 0.33

Karpaz 17.19 13.56 0.3

Source: [18]

Table 4.
Distribution of lead, arsenic, and cadmium in North Cyprus.

9
Heavy Metal Toxicity in Public Health

Area Pb (ppm) As (ppm) Cd (ppm)

Dali 10.25 7.17 0.39

Sotira 14.02 11.68 0.26

Omodos 6.81 6.37 0.20

Acheleia 20.58 10.06 0.35

Evrychou 52.39 18.30 0.26

Polis 13.59 12.43 0.23

Source: [18]

Table 5.
Distribution of lead, arsenic, and cadmium in South Cyprus.

The regulatory standards given in Table 1 hints that lead can be at safe concen-
trations but arsenic and cadmium need attention and may be regarded as present at
above critical limits.

3.2 Heavy metal contamination of agricultural soils of Yedidalga abandoned

copper mine

At Yedidalga harbor of abandoned copper mine at North Cyprus, agricultural

soils were investigated for levels of soil contamination by heavy metals. Figure 4
shows the study area and the sampling locations.
Copper, lead, chromium, cadmium, and zinc concentrations were investigated
on samples collected at nine different locations. The heavy metal contents were

Figure 4.
Study area and sampling locations [19].

10
Heavy Metal Contamination and Remediation of Water and Soil with Case Studies From Cyprus
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90060

determined using atomic absorption spectrophotometer (AAS). The results

obtained are presented in Figure 5.
The findings displayed average concentration levels (mg/kg) as follows: Cu,
208.4; Pb, 119.4; Cr, 18.38; Cd, 6.19; and Zn, 144.2. The corresponding critical
limits of the same heavy metals are as follows: Cu, 13–24; Pb, 22–44; Cr, 12–83; Cd,
0.37–0.78; and Zn, 45–100. Accordingly, there is significant pollution of Cu, Pb, Cd,
and Zn, while there is no pollution with respect to Cr.
The study also evaluated the level of contamination and assessed the potential
ecological risk posed by heavy metals. Several quantitative indices were utilized to
assess the soil pollution status. Results revealed that comparatively all heavy metals
exceeded the background values. The peak values were observed in the soils from
the locations close to the Yedidalga farming lands. Spatial distribution of pollution
load index (PLI) and potential ecological risk index (RI) is given in Figure 6.

Figure 5.
Heavy metal contamination levels at Yedidalga harbor [19].

11
Heavy Metal Toxicity in Public Health

Figure 6.
Spatial distributions of PLI and RI [19].

Figure 7.
Sample collecting locations [20].

Figure 8.
Geological nature of study area [20].

12
13

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90060
Heavy Metal Contamination and Remediation of Water and Soil with Case Studies From Cyprus
Sample no As (μg/L) Cd (μg/L) Cr (μg/L) Hg (μg/L) Pb (μg/L) Fe (μg/L)

1 2.95 ± 0.02 <0.01 6.97 ± 0.19 0.11 ± 0.006 <0.01 1266.9 ± 11.55

2 0.71 ± 0.03 <0.01 12.16 ± 0.06 0.03 ± 0.01 0.24 ± 0.01 305.24 ± 0.88

3 0.47 ± 0.03 <0.01 5.79 ± 0.06 0.03 ± 0.01 1.09 ± 0.01 310.57 ± 4.26

4 0.41 ± 0.00 <0.01 5.78 ± 0.18 0.01 ± 0.01 1.25 ± 0.03 260.57 ± 9.67

5 0.93 ± 0.04 <0.01 14.46 ± 0.10 0.02 ± 0.01 <0.01 186.57 ± 6.84

6 1.43 ± 0.05 <0.01 8.10 ± 0.03 0.03 ± 0.01 1.40 ± 0.05 392.24 ± 1.76

7 0.05 ± 0.01 0.02 ± 0.01 0.32 ± 0.01 <0.01 0.21 ± 0.01 294.90 ± 14.64

8 0.61 ± 0.02 0.03 ± 0.01 0.57 ± 0.01 0.01 ± 0.01 <0.01 602.24 ± 3.48

9 0.19 ± 0.01 0.03 ± 0.01 0.85 ± 0.01 <0.01 0.01 ± 0.003 600.90 ± 25.48

10 1.12 ± 0.01 0.04 ± 0.01 7.44 ± 0.08 0.03 ± 0.01 <0.01 686.90 ± 1.53

11 0.18 ± 0.01 0.01 ± 0.01 9.31 ± 0.12 0.01 ± 0.01 0.03 ± 0.01 313.90 ± 2.89

12 0.12 ± 0.01 0.01 ± 0.01 0.13 ± 0.01 <0.01 0.26 ± 0.01 532.90 ± 7.55

13 0.92 ± 0.01 0.08 ± 0.01 9.55 ± 0.30 <0.01 0.71 ± 0.02 2253.57 ± 61.73

14 0.32 ± 0.03 0.01 ± 0.01 1.17 ± 0.09 <0.01 0.63 ± 0.01 302.90 ± 4.16

15 0.88 ± 0.01 0.03 ± 0.01 2.25 ± 0.02 0.01 ± 0.01 2.79 ± 0.03 370.24 ± 3.76

16 1.49 ± 0.02 <0.01 12.42 ± 0.07 0.02 ± 0.01 0.33 ± 0.03 577.90 ± 0.58

17 0.63 ± 0.01 0.01 ± 0.01 13.39 ± 0.17 0.01 ± 0.01 0.67 ± 0.02 386.90 ± 6.08

18 3.07 ± 0.02 <0.01 11.86 ± 0.01 0.03 ± 0.01 0.68 ± 0.01 754.24 ± 3.84

Table 6.
Heavy metal distribution of Güzelyurt agricultural waters.
Heavy Metal Toxicity in Public Health

Pollution load index graded the overall studied area as moderately–heavily con-
taminated level. Potential ecological risk analysis forwarded that the ecological risk
level indicated that 55.6% of sampling locations exceeded 300 (RI > 300). These
study results definitely suggest that pollution precautions must be implemented.
The main cause of accumulation of these metals is found to be related with the pres-
ence of mine wastes at Yedidalga mine harbor.

3.3 Quality and heavy metal contamination of Güzelyurt agricultural waters

The most active agricultural region of Güzelyurt in North Cyprus was investi-
gated with respect to agricultural quality and heavy metal content. At the same time,
the aim of the research is to shed light on the irrigation water management in the said
region and to assess the groundwater quality. The management methodology was
studied, and representative groundwater samples collected from different villages
(Figure 7) were analyzed for physicochemical parameters and contamination [20].
Within the scope of the study, the geological nature of the study area is also
effective and is given in Figure 8.
The research put forth that the concentration of heavy metals was all below the
FAO guideline threshold limits, following the order Fe > Cr > As>Pb > Hg > Cd.
Table 6 displays the distribution of heavy metals at the study area.
Main cations, on the other hand, indicated Na+ > Mg2+ > Ca2+ > K+, while that
of anions displayed Cl- > HCO3- > SO42- > CO32- that comply with irrigation water
standards. Seawater intrusion was determined by Revelle index; piper diagram
indicated Ca2 + -Mg2 + -Cl − as the major hydro chemical facies; and USSL salinity
diagram was also used for salinity and sodium hazard. Irrigation water quality was
evaluated by sodium adsorption ratio (SAR), residual sodium carbonate, percent of
sodium, magnesium adsorption ratio (MAR), Kelly’s index, total hardness, permea-
bility index, residual Mg2+/Ca2+ ratio, and electrical conductivity. Only SAR values
displayed perfect groundwater quality, while others showed good quality, except for
MAR, which was unsuitable.
In conclusion, the study put forth in general the safe use of the groundwa-
ter for the purpose of irrigation. High amounts of Mg2+ in water resulted in
unsuitable MAR values. Majority of groundwater samples were in the field of
Ca2 + -Mg2 + -Cl − water types. Lack of water management policies brings prob-
lems to farmers.

4. Conclusion

Heavy metal contamination of water and soil is dangerous to human life; but
the issue becomes much critical when the region in question is an agricultural
region. The reason behind this is the entrance of natural or anthropogenic potential
hazardous heavy metals into the human body via food chain. Not only conventional
diseases but various cancer diseases are also observed as a result of research studies.
Consequently, agricultural soil and water must be carefully investigated before
the initiation of the agricultural activities. Acceptable sampling and laboratory
analyses should be executed and evaluated accordingly. In this respect, sources of
contamination (natural or anthropogenic) have to be identified and analyzed for
the presence of contamination.
In case of presence of contamination of soil and water by heavy metals, and if
the concentrations are above the acceptable limits, necessary and timely precautions
must be taken. Of the general biological and chemical methods of remediation, the
former should be preferred, so as not to introduce new chemicals to the medium.

14
Heavy Metal Contamination and Remediation of Water and Soil with Case Studies from Cyprus
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90060

The method of remediation must be selected among phyto-accumulation, phyto-

stabilization, phyto-degradation, phyto-volatilization, and hydraulic control. There
are numerous researches which discuss different types of plant species getting rid
of heavy metals through different methods, without introducing new chemical
contaminations.
Such research should not only be left on paper and must be implemented in
agricultural regions all over the world, with the objective of enhancing the health
and well-being of the humans. Creating necessary awareness in areas of potential
contamination through social responsibility projects will enhance such studies.

Author details

Mustafa Ertan Akün
Faculty of Engineering, Cancer Research Foundation, Biotechnology Research
Center, Environmental Research Center, Cyprus International University, Turkish
Republic of North Cyprus, Turkey

*Address all correspondence to: eakun@ciu.edu.tr

© 2019 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.

15
Heavy Metal Toxicity in Public Health

References

[1] Mehran H, Mitra A, Payam N. Bio- Heavy Metals. Rijeka: Intech Open;
monitoring of airborne heavy metal 2018. pp. 115-133. DOI: 10.5772/
contamination. In: Air Pollution: intechopen.76082
Monitoring, Modelling, Health and
Control. IntechOpen, London-UK; Vol. [9] Muthusaravanan S, Sivarajasekar N,
20. 2012. DOI: 10.5772/32963 Vivek JS, Paramasivan T, Naushad M,
Prakashmaran J, et al. Phytoremediation
[2] Hyun K, Yeo JK, Young RS. An of heavy metals: Mechanisms, methods
overview of carcinogenic heavy and enhancements. Environmental
metal: Molecular toxicity mechanism Chemistry Letters. 2018;16(4):1339-
and prevention. Journal of Cancer 1359. DOI: 10.1007/s10311-018-0762-3
Prevention. 2015;20(4):232. DOI:
10.15430/JCP.2015.20.4.232 [10] Irshad M, Ruqia B, Hussain Z.
Heavy phytoaccumulation of heavy
[3] Preeyaporn K, Young RS. Advances in metals in natural vegetation at
carcinogenic metal toxicity and potential the municipal wastewater site in
molecular markers. International Journal Abbottabad, Pakistan. International
of Molecular Sciences. 2011;12:9576- Journal of Phytoremediation.
9595. DOI: 10.3390/ijms12129576 2015;17(12):1269-1273. DOI:
10.1080/15226514.2014.950409
[4] Bakshi S, Banik C, He Z. The impact
of heavy metal contamination on soil [11] Sateesh NH. Removal of arsenic
health. In: Managing Soil Health for by phyto-re mediation- a study of two
Sustainable Agriculture. Burleigh Dodds plant species. International Journal of
Series In Agricultural Science, USA Scientific Engineering and Technology.
Vol. 2. 2018. pp. 63-95. DOI: 10.19103/ 2012;1(5):218-224
AS.2017.0033.20
[12] Bolan NS, Park JH, Robinson B,
[5] Environmental Pollution Agency, Naidu R, Huh KY. Phytostabilization:
EPA. Edition of the Drinking Water A green approach to contaminant
Standards and Health Advisories Tables; containment. Advances in Agronomy.
2018 2011;112:145-204. DOI: 10.1016/
B978-0-12-385538-1.00004-4
[6] Behbahaninia A, Mirbagheri SA,
Khorasani N, Nouri J, Javid AH. Heavy [13] Newman LA, Reynolds CM. Phyto-
metal contamination of municipal degradation of organic compounds.
effluent in soil and plants. Journal of Current Opinion in Biotechnology.
Food, Agriculture and Environment. 2004;15(3):225-230. DOI: 10.1016/j.
2009;7(3-4):851-856 copbio.2004.04.006

[7] Chiroma TM, Abdulkarim BI, [14] Limmer M, Burken J. Phyto-

Kefas HM. The impact of pesticide Volatilization of Organic Contaminants.
application on heavy metal (Cd, Pb USA: American Chemical Society; 2016.
and Cu) levels in spinach. Leonardo DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b04113
Electronic Journal of Practices and
Technologies. 2007;11:117-122. Available [15] Fowler KR, Kelley CT,
from: https://www.researchgate.net/ Kees CE, Miller CT. A hydraulic capture
publication/26492971 application for optimal remediation
design. Developments in Water Science.
[8] Masindi V, Muedi KL. Environmental 2004;55(Part 2):1149-1157. DOI:
contamination by heavy metals. In: 10.1016/S0167-5648(04)80131-X

16
Heavy Metal Contamination and Remediation of Water and Soil with Case Studies From Cyprus
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90060

[16] Barau BW, Abdulhameed A,

Ezra AG, Muhammad M, Kyari EM,
Bawa U. Heavy metal contamination of
some vegetables from pesticides and the
potential health risk in Bauchi, northern
Nigeria. Affrev Stech: An International
Journal of Science and Technology.
2018;7(1):1-11. DOI: 10.4314/stech.v7i1.1

[17] Chibuike GU, Obiora SC. Heavy

Metal Polluted Soils: Effect on Plants
and Bioremediation Methods. Vol. 2014.
UK: Hindawi Publishing Corporation,
Applied and Environmental Soil
Science; 2014. p. 752708. 1-12. DOI:
10.1155/2014/752708

[18] Akun ME, Yamacı RF,

Charalambous C, Lechtvich S,
Djamgoz MBA. The distribution of
carcinogenic heavy metals in Cyprus
soil. In: Conversion of Agricultural
Wastes into Value Added Product with
high Protein Content by Growing
Pleurotus ostreatus. Switzerland
Springer; 2011. pp. 353-359. DOI:
10.1007/978-3-540-95991-5_33

[19] Barkett MO, Akün E. Heavy metal

contents of contaminated soils and
ecological risk assessment in abandoned
copper mine harbor in Yedidalga,
Northern Cyprus. Environment and
Earth Science. 2019;77:378. DOI:
10.1007/s12665-018-7556-6

[20] Arslan B, Akün E. Management,

contamination and quality evaluation
of groundwater in North Cyprus.
Agricultural Water Management.
2019;222:1-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.
agwat.2019.05.023

17