于2010年9-11月在长江干流朱杨江段采集到8种鱼类标本,分别为圆筒吻(鉤)(Rhinogobio cylindricus)、鲫(Cyprinus auratus)、铜鱼(Coreius heterodon)、圆口铜鱼(Coreius guichenoti、瓦氏黄颡鱼(Pelteobagrus vachelli)、鲤(Cyprinus carpio)、大眼鳜(Siniperca kneri)、鲇(Silurus asotus).在该江段上游支流沱江富顺江段采集到5种鱼类标本,分别为鲤、鲫、大鳍鳠(Mystus macropterus)、大眼鳜、黄颡鱼(Pelteobagrus fulvidraco).各种鱼的样本量为6～12尾.采用快速溶剂萃取及气相色谱法对各标本鱼体内的6种邻苯二甲酸酯(PAEs)含量进行了检测.结果显示,在两个江段的各种鱼类标本体内检测到邻苯二甲酸二乙酯(DEP)、邻苯二甲酸二丁酯(DBP)、邻苯二甲酸丁基苄基酯(BBP)和邻苯二甲酸(2-乙基)己基酯(DEHP)；在所有鱼体样本中均未检出邻苯二甲酸二辛酯(DnOP).在长江干流朱杨江段所采集到的8种鱼中圆筒吻(绚)体内邻苯二甲酸酯的总量(∑PAEs)最高,为(1 818.32±190.88) μg/ks.在沱江富顺江段采集到的5种鱼中鲤体内∑PAEs最高,其含量为(790.60±76.04)μg/kg.在长江朱杨段和沱江富顺段两采集地的相同种类有3种,其中鲤和大眼鳜各自体内的∑PAEs之间的差异不显著,但朱杨段鲫体内的∑PAEs含量显著高于富顺段鲫体内的含量.结果表明,长江朱杨段及支流沱江富顺段的鱼体均受到了PAEs的污染,而长江干流朱杨段的污染程度要稍高于其上游支流沱江富顺段.%During September to November in 2010, eight fish species were collected from the Zhuyang section of the Yangtze River, including Rhinogobio cylindricus, Carassius auratus, Coreius heterodon, Coreius guichenoti, Pelteobagrus vachelli, Cyprinus carpio, Siniperca kneri, Silurus asotus. And five species from the Fushun section of the Tuo River, including C. carpio, C. auratus, Mystus macropterus, S. kneri, Pelteobagrus fulvidraco. The sample size for each fish species is 6 ~ 12. The contents of six components in phthalic acid esters in each sample were measured by gas chromatography with accelerated solvent extraction. The results showed that Diethyl phthalate (DEP), Di - n - butyl phthalate (DBP) , Benzyl butyl phthalate ( BBP) , Di (2 - ethyl hexyl) phthalate ( DEHP) were detected in the ten species, but Di - n - Octyl phthalate ( DnOP) was not detected in any fish sample. The contents of total phthalic acid esters ( Σ PAEs) on R. cylindricus was (1818. 32 ± 190. 88) μg/kg which was the highest in the eight fish species from the Yangtze River. The contents of ΣPAEs in C. carpio is (790. 60 ±76. 04) μg/kg, which was the highest in the five fish species from the Tuo River. Three same species were collected from both Yangtze River and Tuo River. The content of Σ PAEs in C. auratus from the Yangtze River was significantly higher than that from the Tuo River. But the difference of the content, in either C. carpio or S. kneri, was not significant between the two samples from the two rivers. The results suggested that the fish from both the Yangtze River and the Tuo River was polluted by PAEs, and the level of pollution in the Yangtze River is higher than that in the Tuo River.
展开▼
