基于着生硅藻指数的梧桐河水生态健康评价

在黑龙江省梧桐河,调查了13个点位的着生硅藻群落结构和水环境特征,应用8种硅藻指数对该河流水生生态系统进行健康评价,并在此基础上应用主成分分析、相关分析、冗余分析、箱型图分析等统计分析方法研究了影响梧桐河着生藻类群落的主要环境因子和8种硅藻指数在梧桐河的适用情况。结果显示:梧桐河存在一定程度的环境污染,优势种以小型异极藻(Gomphonema parvulum)等耐污种为主。8个硅藻指数中,硅藻属指数(Generic Index of Diatom,GI)、澳大利亚河流硅藻生物评价指数(Diatom Index for Australian Rivers,DIAR;Diatom Species Index for Bioassessment of Australian Rivers,DSIAR)评价结果偏差较大,在梧桐河不适用;相似度指数(Jaccard Index,JI)与富营养化硅藻指数(Trophic Diatom Index,TDI)评价结果较为严格,评分明显偏低;硅藻污染耐受指数(Pollution Tolerance Index,PTI)、硅藻生物评价指数(Diatom Bioassessment Index,DBI)和生物硅藻指数(Biological Diatom Index,BDI)在梧桐河流域适用性最好。根据冗余分析(RDA),将梧桐河流域点位分为3组,第一组点位为中-重度污染,主要影响因子为流速和总磷;第二组点位为轻-中度污染,主要影响因子为磷酸盐、氨氮和溶解氧;第三组点位为轻污染-清洁,主要影响因子为p H和电导率。     

香溪河流域水生态系统健康评价

随着人们环境保护意识的增强,河湖生态保护与修复成为社会关注的热点问题,科学的生态健康诊断则是有效进行河湖治理的前提.香溪河作为三峡水库典型支流,探究其水生态系统健康对于长江生态保护具有十分重要的意义.通过收集整理香溪河干支流的生物与生境数据,构建了涵盖水环境、水生生物、物理栖息地三方面共16项指标的水生态系统健康评价指标体系,综合运用专家判断法和熵权法确定评价因子权重,采用河流健康指数（RHI）表征香溪河流域水生态系统健康状况.结果表明:①2017年三峡水库蓄水期香溪河流域水生态系统整体健康水平为良好,优和良等级占比分别为12.5%和79.2%.②健康状况呈现出支流优于干流、非回水区优于回水区的空间分布特点,具体表现为支流南阳河>支流古夫河>支流高岚河>香溪河干流.干流水环境问题相对突出,而支流的河流连通性相对较差.③库湾健康状况的年内变化特征为冬季最好,春秋季次之,夏季最差.研究显示,该评价体系能准确地评估香溪河流域水生态健康状况,同时需重视三峡水库支流库湾的水环境治理.      

海南省集约化种植园中谷物、蔬菜和水果中重金属累积程度及健康风险

集约化种植园中植物有害元素的累积会危及人类健康.本研究共采集海南省典型集约化种植园中谷物、蔬菜和水果样品673份.分析了7种重金属（Cu、Pb、Zn、Cr、Cd、As和Hg）的分布特征,并采用单因子指数和内梅罗指数进行污染物评价.同时,结合中国营养学会推荐的日常膳食摄入量,分析重金属的膳食暴露风险.结果表明,673件农作物的Cu、As和Hg含量均低于国家食品限量标准,Pb、Zn、Cr和Cd的超标率分别为2.67%、3.71%、2.53%和3.71%.6类农作物的重金属综合污染程度表现为：叶类蔬菜 > 薯类 > 非叶类蔬菜类 > 豆类 > 水果 > 谷类.其中,叶类蔬菜中Cr的风险系数（HQ）显著高于其它类型农作物,并且大于1,表明通过叶类蔬菜摄入重金属具有潜在健康风险.薯类、非叶菜蔬菜类、豆类、水果类和谷类农作物的危害指数（HI）较低,表明这几类农作物更适合集约化生产模式.     

美国水环境质量基准体系

美国依据《清洁水法》建立了一套较完善的水环境质量基准体系,并开展了水生生物基准、人体健康基准、营养物基准、沉积物质量基准、细菌基准、生物学基准、野生生物基准和物理基准等方面的研究. 在重点分析美国水环境质量基准体系、基准制定方法和研究进展的基础上,提出了我国开展水环境质量基准研究的建议,即提高对我国开展水环境质量基准研究的迫切性和重要性的认识,并根据我国的实际情况,建立一套适合我国国情的水环境基准体系和基准制订工作指南,同时做好国外水环境质量基准的采用与验证工作.      

北京西山地区不同林分健康状况比较研究

以不同树种林分健康状况比较研究为切入点,以北京西山地区同一时期的油松×侧柏混交林、油松（Pinus tabulaeformis）林、侧柏（Platycladus orientalis）林和栓皮栎（Quercus variabis）林为研究对象。通过构建林分健康评价指标体系,计算林分综合健康指数,分别对不同林分的健康状况进行了分析和比较,探讨不同林分开展森林健康经营的关键环节,同时也从森林健康的角度说明造林树种选择的重要性。研究结果表明：各林分综合健康指数都为正值但数值都不高,这表明目前各林分都处于健康状态,但对外界扰动反应较为敏感,按健康状况排序：油松×侧柏林0．234〉栓皮栎林0．186〉油松林0．145〉侧柏林0．128;从单个指标看,各林分中都有负值指标出现,由此揭示,对负值指标的调整和增加正向指标的指标值是森林健康经营的关键。     

提高碳汇潜力：量化树种和造林模式对碳储量的影响

全球气候变化背景下,造林再造林固定的碳可以抵消温室气体减限排量。通过造林再造林增加森林面积可以增加林业碳汇,在土地面积有限的情况下,提高造林质量——在有限的造林面积上固定更多的碳是十分必要的。树种和造林模式的选择是增加森林生态系统碳汇的重要管理决策。文章综述了树种和造林模式对生态系统的碳储量的影响。树种从生物量的积累,凋落物和土壤碳储存,以及木材密度、碳贮存量等几个方面探讨其对生态系统碳库的影响。混交林能充分利用立地条件、改善树木营养状况,并且可以减少病虫害和森林火灾。同时分析了我国在森林经营方面存在的问题和改善途径,以期为该领域的研究提供参考。     

基于健康风险的土壤修复目标研究程序与方法——以多环芳烃污染土壤再利用工程为例

提出了基于人体健康风险的土壤修复目标的制定方法和程序,并以上海市某重大工程多环芳烃污染土壤处理后再利用工程为例,模拟了多环芳烃在处置场地上的多介质迁移途径及人体暴露场景。模拟结果显示,填埋场污染土壤苯并(a)芘(该污染物毒性因子高,毒性强,致癌风险相对较大)经口摄入和皮肤接触途径最大致癌暴露量分别为1.89×10-6和0.93×10-6mg.kg-1.d-1,人体最大致癌风险水平分别为1.38×10-5和6.79×10-6,超出了中国规定的单致癌污染物的可接受风险水平(≤10-6)。苯并(a)芘呼吸吸入途径最大致癌暴露量为7.79×10-10mg.m-3,人体最大致癌风险水平为6.86×10-10。基于场地的特征条件和参数,以保护人体健康为目的,确定了再利用作为填埋场中层覆土的土壤中5种多环芳烃污染物的修复目标限值(w,mg.kg-1)分别为:苯并(a)芘,0.994;二苯并(a,h)蒽,0.995;苯并(a)蒽,9.95;苯并(b)荧蒽,9.95;苯并(k)荧蒽,99.5。     

Handheld-Assisted Field Data Collection for Occupational Risk Assessment

A computerized handheld procedure is presented in this paper. It is intended as a database complementary tool, to enhance prospective risk analysis in the field of occupational health. The Pendragon forms software (version 3.2) has been used to implement acquisition procedures on Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) and to transfer data to a computer in an MS-Access format. The data acquisition strategy proposed relies on the risk assessment method practiced at the Institute of Occupational Health Sciences (IST). It involves the use of a systematic hazard list and semi-quantitative risk assessment scales. A set of 7 modular forms has been developed to cover the basic need of field audits. Despite the minor drawbacks observed, the results obtained so far show that handhelds are adequate to support field risk assessment and follow-up activities. Further improvements must still be made in order to increase the tool effectiveness and field adequacy.     

Working Life Across Cultures: “Work Life 2000: Quality in Work” and Occupational Health Education in Developing Countries

The article reflects on the changing world of work, and the challenges presented to both occupational health and occupational health education. We draw on the 63 preparatory workshops and the international conference in the “Work Life 2000: Quality in Work” program, an initiative of the Swedish Presidency of the European Union. The International Commission on Occupational Health is introduced, with particular concentration on a current practical project initiated by the Department of Health in South Africa, intended to lead to a set of projects, networking for occupational health education in developing countries. The practical initiatives cast light on a new set of issues that arise when occupational health and safety crosses cultural barriers, and previously separate comparative cases are linked.     

Occupational Health and Social Resources

There is a relationship between the changes in work-related diseases and the following factors: the transformation of the organization of work, organizational development, as well as human and social changes in the work environment. These factors also influence the maintenance of industrial health and safety standards at work. Safety technology will continue to be important, but will be reduced in significance compared to the so-called soft factors, that is, all dimensions and parameters affecting people’s health and social environment at the work place.

It seems that in the future the relationship between the social resource development and work protection will become more relevant. Social resource development influences the quality of work performance and motivation, the quality of work and work protection, the likelihood of accidents and breakdowns, and the level of self-control and capacity of change.

The consequences of work protection research will be discussed in this article with a focus on the contribution of social sciences.