Journal of the

Nigerian Society
of Physical
J. Nig. Soc. Phys. Sci. 3 (2021) 406–413
Sciences

Characterization and Evaluation of Human Health Risk of Heavy

Metals in Tin Mine Tailings in Selected Area of Plateau State,
Nigeria
D. D. Bwedea , R. A. Wuanab , G. O. Egahc,∗, A. U. Itodob , E. Ogahd , E. A. Yerimac , A. I. Ibrahimc
a Department of Basic Sciences, Plateau State College of Health Technology Zawan, Nigeria
b Department of Chemistry Federal University of Agriculture Makurdi, Benue State, Nigeria
c Department of Chemical Sciences, Federal University Wukari, Taraba State, Nigeria
d Department of Chemistry University of Jos, Jos, Plateau State, Nigeria

Abstract
Tin mining tailings are unprocessed waste materials that overlie an ore which are displaced during mining activities. This research work is aimed
at characterizing and evaluating the human health risk of heavy metals in tin mine tailings in Zabot (S3) and Tafan (S4) districts in Barkin Ladi
Local Government Area of Plateau State, Nigeria. The samples were characterized using EDX-XRF and SEM. The concentrations of seven heavy
metals (Pb, Cr, As, Ni, Cd, Cu and Zn) were determined in S3 and S4. The results showed that Cr, Ni, Cd, Cu and Zn were within the USEPA
permissible limits, except for Pb and As with range of (270-300) mg/kg and (40-70) mg/kg respectively for both mining and control sites of S3
and S4. The SEM results revealed small particles size with fine porous structure, and rough areas with varying sizes and pores distributed over
the surface for S3 and S4 respectively. Results of the risk assessment showed that the hazard quotient HQ and HI values were greater than 1
indicating high risk. The Carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks associated with Pb, Zn, Cd, Cr, Ni and As were evaluated for S3 and S4 for the
three exposure pathway and it was found that the mining sites pose more risk than the control and the children were more exposed than the adults.
The carcinogenicity of these samples were due to the high hazard quotient for ingestion and dermal exposure pathway. The Rtotal results for As,
Cr, Pb and Ni for mining site S3 were found to be (1.39 × 102 , 2.02 × 10−7 , 3.30 × 103 and 8.17 × 10−8 ), and control site (3.42 × 103 , 2.64 × 10−5 ,
38.30 × 101 , 6.90 × 10−8 ) for As, Cr, Pb and Ni respectively. From the Rtotal results As and Pb were more than the acceptable threshold, while Cr
and Ni were below the threshold of 1 × 10−4 . For the mining site S4, the Rtotal were found to be (5.70 × 102 , 1.82 × 10−7 , 3.63 × 104 and 9.64 × 10−9 ),
and the control (1.16 × 103 , 1.71 × 10−7 , 31.1 × 102 and 1.51 × 10−8 ) for As, Cr, Pb and Ni respectively. From the results of the mining and control
sites, As and Pb Rtotal were higher than the acceptable threshold, while Cr and Ni were below the threshold of 1 × 10−4 .

DOI:10.46481/jnsps.2021.262

Keywords: Tailings, Heavy metals, Hazard Index, Carcinogenic Risk and Hazard Quotient

Article History :
Received: 18 June 2021
Received in revised form: 16 September 2021
Accepted for publication: 17 September 2021
Published: 29 November 2021

c
2021 Journal of the Nigerian Society of Physical Sciences. All rights reserved.
Communicated by: S. J. Adebiyi

1. Introduction
∗ Correspondingauthor tel. no: +2347061097995 Tin mining tailings are wastes fractions of an ore or min-
Email address: egah.godwin@yahoo.com (G. O. Egah ) eral body which are discarded during mining operations without
being processed. Tin tailings contains both magnetic minerals
406
 Bwede et al. / J. Nig. Soc. Phys. Sci. 3 (2021) 406–413 407

(iron ore, columbite) and non-magnetic minerals (cassiterite, 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

monozite, zircon sand in large quantity and silica) [1]. They are
used in preparation of fertilizer, animal feeds, refractory prod- 2.1. Sample Location and Description
ucts, for building roads and backfilling of tailing storage facili- This research work was carried out in Zabot (S3) and Tafan
ties [2]. (S4) district of Barkin Ladi Local Government Area of Plateau
State, Nigeria. It is located between latitude 90510 3000 N and
In the 1960s, Nigeria was regarded as one of the world’s longitude 80480 0000 E. The state is located in the middle belt of
leading tin producing country, but production later decreased Nigeria, with an area of 30.91 km (11936 square mile). The
towards the end of the twentieth century. However, mining ac- state has a population of about three million people in estimate.
tivities are still going on in these areas. Apart from tin which The name Plateau State was given because of its topography
is the primary target, tin mining generates tin tailings, which with wonderful rock formations. The height of the mountains
are by-product of the ore. The amount of tailings produced ranges from 1,200 to 1,829 meters above sea level. Mining and
ranged from 90-98 % for copper ores and 20-50 % for other subsistence farming are the major occupation of its residents.
minerals [3]. Some of the heavy metals found in contaminated The sampling locations and points are as shown in Figure 1, us-
tailings are Pb, Cr, As, Zn, Cd, Cu, Ni and Hg [4, 5, 6]. Heavy ing the geographical positioning system (GPS) to locate Zabot
metal contamination and their human health threats are some of (S3) and Tafan (S4).
the serious environmental problems limiting mining activities
[7, 8].

With the development of mining, smelting and other indus-

trial activities, heavy metals are increasingly being found in
the environment which can pose severe threats to humans and
the environment. Pollution by heavy metals such as lead (Pb),
chromium (Cr), arsenic (As), nickel (Ni), cadmium (Cd), cop-
per (Cu) and zinc (Zn), affects the quality of the ambient air,
soil and water bodies which in turn threatens the life of both
animals and humans through the food chain [2].

During mining activities huge waste tailing ponds are cre-

ated which have a high environmental impact on the surround-
ing ecosystems and populations when used [9, 10]. In order to
evaluate the risk posed by tin mine tailings activities to human Figure 1. GPS Map Showing the Sites of Sample Collection.
health, there is need to assess the level of heavy metal pollution
in these sites and the rate at which they affects human life. This
is based on preliminary studies on waste properties, heavy met- 2.2. Sampling collection and preparation
als concentration and their relation to the environment as they The random sampling technique was applied for sample
affect the individuals who participated in these tailings activi- collection with little modification. Two samples of 50 g each
ties and the community [11]. were taken from mining sites in Zabot (S3) and Tafan (S4) in
Barkin Ladi Local Government Area of Plateau State, with their
Human health risk assessment involves the evaluation of respective control. The tin mine tailings and soil samples were
possible human health effect in the contaminated environmental washed, dried and pulverized into the required particle sizes of
media [12]. The health effect of contaminants on humans de- 2 mm. Pre-treatments which does not alter the chemical com-
pends on the level of exposure, nature of the contaminants and position of the analytes were done to obtain the original con-
vulnerability of the individual affected [13]. Health effects may centration of the analyte found in the sample.
include risk of cancer, hypertension, acute foetus neurological
disorders, organ dysfunction, respiratory difficulties, physical 2.3. Determination soil pH and Temperature
and mental disorder, reduced life expectancy and weakening of 1.0 g of soil sample from both mining and control sites were
the body’s immune system [12]. mixed with 100 cm3 of deionized water in 250 cm3 conical flask
and stirred using a magnetic stirrer for 10 minutes. The temper-
Therefore, this research is aimed at characterizing and eval- ature and pH were determined using Hanna portable pH meter
uating the human health risk of heavy metals in tin mine tail- (model HI8043) and thermometer respectively. The readings
ings in Zabot and Tafan district both represented by S3 and S4 were taken in triplicates and the average recorded accordingly.
respectively in Barkin Ladi Local Government Area, Plateau
State, Nigeria.

407
 Bwede et al. / J. Nig. Soc. Phys. Sci. 3 (2021) 406–413 408

2.4. Sample Characterization Total cancer risk (RT) is given as:

2.4.1. Elemental analysis
RT = D × S F, (6)
The concentrations of the various heavy metals contained
in the samples were determined using Energy dispersive X-ray where D = Dose, SF=Slope factor.
fluorescence spectrometer EDX-XRF (MiniPAL4). The XRF
analysis was done directly on solid powdered specimen for ac- Risk characterization was considered separately for carcino-
curate results with no risk of contamination. Sample prepara- genic and non-carcinogenic effects [16, 17]. Health risks were
tion involves milling of the sample to less than 75 µm in frac- obtained by comparing the calculated HQ, HI and Rtotal values
tion. Retsch RS 200 vibratory disk milling machine was used with recommended maximum values shown on Table 1.
at 1500 min−1 motor speed for 5 minutes. The milled sample
was collected in XRF cup and placed in the XRF spectrometer
and analyzed for chemical composition. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Determination soil pH and Temperature

2.4.2. Determination of Surface Morphology
The surface morphology of the tailings was determined us- The results of the pH and Temperature obtained from the
ing scanning electron microscope (SEM-MVE016477830). The study area are presented in Table 2.
sputter coater was operated in an argon atmosphere using a cur- The pH and temperature results of the samples are presented
rent of 6 mA for 3 minutes. in Table 2. The pH obtained from the mining and the control
sites were (5.23, 5.11) and (7.48, 7.21) for Zabot and Tafan re-
2.5. Human Health Risk Assessment Parameters spectively. The pH results showed that the two mining sites
The carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks were evalu- were slightly acidic, while the control sites were slightly alka-
ated using the human health risk assessment model for dermal line. The soil temperatures were within the range of 29 to 30◦ C,
contact, ingestion and inhalation exposure pathways [13]. The which are suitable for plants growth [19].
health risk assessment is centered on the exposure factors and
guidelines handbook of United States Environmental Protec- 4. Scanning Electron Microscopy of Tin Mines Tailings
tion Agency (USEPA) [14]. The average daily dose (ADD)
via inhalation (ADDinh ), ingestion (ADDing ) and dermal con- The results of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) for tin
tact (ADDderm ) for both children and adults were evaluated us- mine tailing site S3 and S4 are as shown in Plates 1 (Figure 2)
ing equations (1) - (3) as adopted from Qing et al., [13]. and 2 (Figure 3), respectively.
CS × IngR × EF × ED × CF
Ingestion dose Ding−s = (1)
BW × AT
CS × InhR × EF × ED
Inhalation dose (Dinh−s ) = (2)
BW × AT × PEF
CS × S A × S L × EF × ED × CF
Dermal dose (Dder−s ) = ,(3)
BW × AT
where CS is the concentration of the analyte in the tailing from
the exposure point (mg/kg), IngR - tailing ingestion rate for
the receptor (mg/d), InhR - soil inhalation rate for the recep-
tor (m3/d), EF - exposure frequency (days/year), ED - exposure
duration (years), PEF - soil-to-air particulate emission factor
(m3 /kg), SA - skin surface area available for exposure (cm2 ),
SL - soil-to-skin adherence factor (mg/cm2 /event), BW - time-
averaged body weight (kg), AT - average time of non-carcinogenic Figure 2. Plate 1: The Scanning Electron Microscope Micrograph (SEM) of
and carcinogenic risks (days) and ABS - dermal absorption fac- Zabot S3.
tor (dimensionless). The hazard quotient, hazard index and total
cancer risk were evaluated using equations (4) – (6) as adopted Result of S3 on Plate 1, showed homogenous small size par-
from Man et al., [15]. ticles with fine porous structure. While results on plate 2 (S4),
showed a micrograph with rough area having different irregu-
The Hazard Quotient is given as: lar shapes of varying sizes and pores distributed over the sur-
face. The more the number of pores the better the soil aeration
D
HQ = , (4) [20, 21]. From the two results (Plates 1 and 2), it can be seen
RfD that the S4 has more pores than the S3.
where D = Dose (ingestion, inhalation or dermal), RfD = Ref-
erence dose. The Hazard index HI is given as:
HI = HQing + HQinh + HQderns (5)
408
 Bwede et al. / J. Nig. Soc. Phys. Sci. 3 (2021) 406–413 409

Table 1. USEPA Reference Doses for Non carcinogens and Slope Factor for Carcinogens Source: [18]
Rf Ding Rf D/mg.kg−1 .d−1 Rf Ddermal SFing SF/kg.d,mg−1 SFinh SFdermal
As 3.00E-04 1.23E-04 1.50 E+00 1.51 E+00 3.66 E+00
Cr 3.00E-03 2.86 E-05 6.00 E-05 4.2 E+01
Cu 4.00 E-02 4.02 E-02 1.20 E-02
Pb 1.40 E-03 3.52 E-03 5.25 E-05 8.50 E-03
Ni 2.00 E-02 2.06 E-02 5.40 E-03 8.40 E-1
Zn 3.00 E-01 3.00 E-01 6.00 E-02
Hg 3.00 E-04 8.57 E-05 3.00 E-05
RfD=Reference dose and SF=Slope factor

tions by transport mechanism on the site [19]. This agrees with

Table 2. pH and Temperature of Tin mine Tailings and Control Soil
the work reported by Bwede et al., [3]. The extreme concentra-
Sample pH Temperature ◦ C tion of As and Pb may be via bioaccumulation in plant which
Tin Mine Site S3 5.23 30 then enters the food chain when these plants are consumed [22].
Control S3 7.48 29 Also, the concentrations of the heavy metals from the mining
Tin Mine Site S4 5.11 29 sites are significantly higher than the control sites which may
Control S4 7.21 30 be due to anthropogenic activities within the environment [23].
Zn found in the area may be as a result of its natural abundance
in the parent material [24]. This agrees with the work reported
by Banerjee [25], that iron oxides adsorb some quantities of Zn
in the lattice structure.

4.2. Human Health Risk Assessment of the Site

The human health risk assessment results for the non-carcinogenic
and carcinogenic are shown in Tables 4 - 7 for children and
adult respectively. For the non-carcinogenic risk (Tables 4 and
5), if the hazard quotient (HQ) and hazard index (HI) are greater
than 1, then adverse health effects may occur [15, 16]. Also for
carcinogenic risk level (Table 6-7), total cancer risk (Rtotal ) val-
ues greater 1 × 10−4 represents elevated risks, Rtotal less than
1 × 10−6 does not pose any significant health risk, and Rtotal
values between 1 × 10−4 and 1 × 10−3 are generally considered
Figure 3. Plate 2: The Scanning Electron Microscope Micrograph (SEM) of acceptable [26, 17].
Tafan (S4).
4.2.1. Non-carcinogenic risk assessment (NCR) for S3 and S4
4.1. Heavy Metal Concentration in Tin Mine Tailings and Con- The results on Tables 4 - 5, are the non-carcinogenic risk
trol Sites assessment of (Pb, Zn, Cd, Cr, Ni and As) for S3 and S4. The
three human exposure routes considered in this study were in-
The heavy metals concentrations of Pb, Cr, As, Zn, Cd, Ni gestion, inhalation and dermal exposure. For mining site S3,
and Cu in Tin mine tailings and control sites are presented in values of HQ for ingestion and dermal for children are all greater
Table 3. than 1, except for inhalation which are all less than 1. Accord-
The results on Table 3, belong to the heavy metals concen- ing to Huang et al., [16], HQ and HI greater than 1 are indi-
trations of the tin mine tailings and the control site in Zabot of cation of high cancer exposure risk, while values less than 1
Barkin Ladi Local Government Area. These were determined indicates that there are no significant effects. Therefore, since
using Energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometer EDX- the ingestion and dermal values are greater than 1, they have
XRF (MiniPAL4). The results showed that the heavy metals high risk exposure. Similar results were observed for adults,
concentrations were within the USEPA permissible limits of the except for Cr (1.69 × 10−1 ) which is less than 1 for ingestion.
soil, except for Pb and As with range of (270-300) mg/kg and
(40-70) mg/kg respectively, which are higher than the USEPA For the control (S3), the results of children for the three ex-
permissible limits of 80 and 0.07 mg/kg for both Pb and As re- posure pathways are greater than 1, except for Cr, Pb and Ni
spectively [22]. The high concentration of As and Pb may be with values (7.05 × 10−5 , 1.32 × 10−4 and 0.60 × 10−6 ), respec-
traceable to the tin mining activities, farming activities such as tively which are less than 1 indicating no risk [16]. Similar
application of agricultural chemicals and atmospheric deposi- results were observed for adults, except for Ni (2.10 × 10−6 )
409
 Bwede et al. / J. Nig. Soc. Phys. Sci. 3 (2021) 406–413 410

Table 3. Heavy Metals Concentration in Tin Mine Tailings and Control Samples in Zabot, and Tafan in Barkin Ladi Local Government Area of Plateau State,
Nigeria in (mg/kg)

Heavy metal Tin mine Tailing Control USEPA (2009)

S3 S4 S3 S4
Pb 300 1,900 280 270 80
Cr 900 1,000 170 1,600 100,000
As 40 60 70 60 0.07
Zn ND 200 BDL 180 23,000
Cd ND ND BDL BDL 1.7
Ni 210 50 70 79 1,600
Cu ND ND BDL BDL 3,000
BDL: Below detection limits

Table 4. Human Health Risk Assessment of Non-Carcinogenic Hazard of Heavy Metals for Zabot (S3)
Non Carcinogenic hazards S3
Group Heavy Metal HQing HQinh HQdern-s HI
Tin mine tailing from
mine site Children As 2.65×106 NC 2.19×105 2.87×106

Cr 9.43×106 8.78×10−5 4.84×105 9.91×106

Pb 1.9×107 1.67×10−4 5.83×105 1.95×107
Ni 3.43×104 0.74×10−6 0.15×103 3.46×104
Zn 7.73×104 2.33×10−7 4.43 7.73×103
Sum 3.12×107 2.56×10−4 1.29×106 3.23×107

Adult As 4.03×105 NC 4.46×104 4.48×105

Cr 1.69×10−1 4.44×10−3 1.21×102 1.27×102
Pb 2.91×106 0.86×10−4 1.17×105 3.02×106
Ni 0.53×104 3.85×10−7 0.03×103 5.33×103
Zn 1.18×103 1.06×10−7 8.87 1.19×103
Sum 3.35×106 4.53×10−3 1.62×105 3.48×106

Soil from agricultural

farmland around mine
site

Children As 2.03×106 NC 1.79×105 2.21×106

Cr 7.86×106 7.05×10−5 4.02×104 7.72×106
Pb 1.50×107 1.32×10−4 4.60×105 1.54×107
Ni 2.76×104 0.60×10−6 0.12×103 2.77×104
Zn 7.33×103 1.96×106 4.22×101 7.37×103
Sum 2.49×107 1.96×106 6.79×105 2.54×107

Adult As 3.37×105 NC 3.71×104 3.71×104

Cr 0.68×103 5.56×103 0.51×105 5.72×104
Pb 2.29×106 0.66×104 0.92×105 2.88×106
Ni 4.22×103 2.10×10−6 0.02×103 4.24×103
Zn 1.12×104 1.43×10−7 8.43×10−3 1.12×104
Sum 2.64×106 1.22×104 1.80×105 2.99×106
NC: Not Calculated

410
 Bwede et al. / J. Nig. Soc. Phys. Sci. 3 (2021) 406–413 411

Table 5. Human Risk Assessment of Non-carcinogenic Hazard of Heavy Metals in Tafan (S4)
Non Carcinogenic hazards S4
Group Heavy Metal HQing HQinh HQdern−s HI
Tin mine tailing from mine
site
Soil from agricultural farm- Children As 1.80×10−8 2.70×101 2.19×104 2.87×106
land around mine site

Cr 9.43×106 2.54×101 4.84×105 9.91×106

Pb 1.9×107 1.67×104 5.83×105 1.95×107
Ni 3.45×104 0.74×10−6 0.15×103 3.46×104
Zn 7.73×104 2.33×107 4.43×101 7.73×103
Sum 2.85×107 2.33×107 1.09×10−6 3.23×107

Adult As 4.03×105 5.48×107 4.46×104 4.48×105

Cr 5.63×101 7.24×103 1.21×102 1.27×102
Pb 2.91×106 0.86×10−6 1.17×105 3.02×106
Ni 0.53×104 3.85×107 0.03×103 5.33×103
Zn 1.18×103 1.06×107 8.87×105 1.19×103
Sum 3.32×106 1.45×108 3.47×106
1.62×105
Children As 2.03×106 2.20×101 1.79×105 2.21×106
Cr 7.86×106 2.11 4.02×104 7.72×106
Pb 1.50×102 4.64×107 4.60×105 1.54×107
Ni 5.51×102 2.76×104 0.12×103 2.77×104
Zn 7.33×103 1.96×107 4.22×101 7.37×103
Sum 2.49×107 6.60×107 6.79×105 2.32×107

Adult As 3.37×105 NC 3.71×104 3.74×105

Cr 2.03×103 5.56×103 0.51×105 5.72×104
Pb 2.29×106 0.66×10−4 0.92×105 2.38×106
Ni 4.22×103 2.10×106 0.02×103 4.24×103
Zn 1.12×104 1.43×10−7 8.43×10−3 1.12×104
Sum 2.65×106 2.11×106 1.80×105 2.83×106
NC: Not Calculated

Table 6. Individual Carcinogenic Risk at the site Zabot (S3)

Group Heavy Metal Carcinogenic Risk S3 Rtotal
Ring−s Rinh−s Rdern−s
As 1.17 × 102 1.14 × 10−8 22.18 1.39 × 102
Cr NC 1.64 × 10−7 NC 2.02 × 10−7
Tin mine tailings from mine site Pb 3.30×103 NC NC 3.30 × 103
Ni NC 8.17 × 10−8 NC 8.17 × 10−8
Sum 3.41 × 103 2.57 × 10−3 22.18 16.41 × 106

As 7.61×102 2.12×10-8 1.60×101 3.42×103

Cr NC 2.64×10−5 NC 2.64×10−5
Soil from agricultural farmland around mine site Pb 2.16 ×101 NC 1.67×101 38.30×101
Ni NC 6.90×10−8 NC 6.90×10−8
Sum 78.26×102 2.64×10−5 32.70×101 3.80×109
NC: Not Calculated

411
 Bwede et al. / J. Nig. Soc. Phys. Sci. 3 (2021) 406–413 412

Table 7. Individual Carcinogenic Risk at the site Zabot (S3)

Group Heavy Metal Carcinogenic Risk S3 Rtotal
Ring−s Rinh−s Rdern−s
2 −8
As 4.55×10 4.16×10 115.14 5.70×102
Cr NC 1.82×10−7 NC 1.82×10−7
Tin mine tailings from mine site Pb 3.63×104 NC NC 3.63×104
Ni NC 9.64×10−9 NC 9.64×10−9
Sum 36.76×103 2.33×10−4 115.14 9.64×109

As 1.14×103 3.46×10−8 2.4×101 1.16×103

Cr 1.71×10−7 NC NC 1.71×10−7
Soil from agricultural farmland around mine site Pb 2.05×102 NC 106.11 31.1×102
Ni NC 1.51×10−8 NC 1.51×10-8
Sum 1.34×103 4.97×10−2 130.11×102 4.27×103
NC: Not Calculated

and Zn (1.43 × 10−7 ) that are less than 1 and pose no risk [16]. 4.2.2. Carcinogenic Risk Assessment for S3 and S4
Also, the HI values were all greater than 1, indicating signifi- The Carcinogenic risks associated with As, Cr, Pb and Ni
cant effects. The summation of HQ for ingestion in the mining were evaluated as presented in Table 6. From the S3 results, the
and control sites are (3.12 × 107 and 3.35 × 106 ), and (2.49 × 107 Rtotal for mining site were found to be (1.39 × 102 , 2.02 × 10−7 ,
and 2.64 × 106 ) for children and adults respectively. From the 3.30 × 103 and 8.17 × 10−8 ), and control site (3.42 × 103 , 2.64 ×
results, it is observed that the mining site poses higher risk 10−5 , 38.30 × 101 , 6.90 × 10−8 ) for As, Cr, Pb and Ni respec-
than the control site, and the children are at higher risk than tively. For carcinogenic risk (Table 6), total cancer risk (Rtotal )
the adults due to their high values [27]. Similar results were values greater than 1 × 10−4 represents elevated risks, Rtotal less
reported by Ngole-Jeme and Fantke [28] for, studies on eco- than 1 × 10−6 represents no significant health risk, and Rtotal
logical and human health risks associated with abandoned gold values between 1 × 10−4 and 1 × 10−3 are generally considered
mine tailings contaminated soil. acceptable [26, 17]. From the mining and control results, it
was observed that the values of the Rtotal for As and Pb were
The non-carcinogenic risk (NCR) results for Tafan (S4) are more than the acceptable threshold, while Cr and Ni were be-
presented in Table 5. For mining site, the HQ values for chil- low the threshold representing elevated risks and no significant
dren were found to be greater than 1, except for As and Ni with health risk respectively [17]. Similar results were observed by
values (1.80×10−8 and 0.74×10−6 ) via ingestion and inhalation Narsimha and Haike [26] for, studies on distribution, contam-
respectively. According to Man et al., [15], HQ greater than 1 is ination, and health risk assessment of heavy metals in surface
an indication of high risk exposure. For the adults, the HQ were soils from northern Telangana, India.
found to be greater than 1, except for Pb with value 0.86 × 10−6
which is less than 1 indicating significant and no significant ef- From results of the mining site S4 (Table 7), the Rtotal were
fect respectively [28]. found to be (5.70×102 , 1.82×10−7 , 3.63×104 and 9.64×10−9 ),
and the control were found to be (1.16 × 103 , 1.7110−7 , 31.1 ×
For the control site (S4) results for children (Table 5), it was 102 and 1.51 × 10−8 ) for As, Cr, Pb and Ni, respectively. From
observed that both the HQ and HI values were all greater than the results of the mining and control sites, it is observed that
1 representing significant effects [16]. The adults result for As, the values for As and Pb Rtotal were higher than the acceptable
Cr, Pb, Ni and Zn also showed that HQ and HI values were all threshold, while Cr and Ni were below the threshold. These re-
greater than 1, except for Zn which has values of 1.43 × 10−7 sults showed that As and Pb pose elevated risks, while Cr and
and 8.43 × 10−3 for inhalation and dermal less than 1, indicating Ni does not pose any significant health risk [26, 17]. Further-
cancer and non-cancer risk respectively [15]. The summation of more, values from the mining site indicate more pollution than
HQ for ingestion in the mining and control sites are (2.85 × 107 the control.
and 3.32 × 106 ), and (2.49 × 107 and 2.65 × 106 ) for children and
adults respectively. In terms of population group for NCRs, it
5. Conclusion
is observed that the mining site pose more risk than the control
site, and the children are at higher risk than the adults due to The results of the analysis of this research work showed
their high values [28]. From the results for the three different that both the mining and control sites in Zabot and Tafan in
exposure pathways of metals for children and adults, the con- Barkin Ladi L.G.A and environs contains certain concentra-
tribution of HQ is in the order of ingestion greater than dermal tion of heavy metals (Pb, Ni, Zn, Cr, Cd, As and Cu) in dif-
and dermal greater than inhalation for As, Cr, Pb, Ni and Zn in ferent fractions. The surface morphology of the tin mine tail-
the studied mining and control areas for S4. ings through the use of scanning electron microscopy (SEM)
412
 Bwede et al. / J. Nig. Soc. Phys. Sci. 3 (2021) 406–413 413

technique revealed homogenous sized particles with fine porous [10] G. M. Mudd, “An analysis of historic production trends in Australian base
structure, and rough area having different irregular shapes of metal mining”, Ore Geology Reviews 32 (2007) 1.
[11] B. Wei, F. Jiang, X. Li, and S. Mu, “Heavy metal induced ecological risk
varying sizes and pores distributed over the surface for both S3 in the city of Urumqi, NW China”, Environment Monitoring Assessment
and S4 respectively. From the hazard quotient (HQ) and human 160 (2010) 33.
health risk derived from carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic haz- [12] Z. Li, Z. Ma, T. J. Vander Kuijp, Z. Yuan & L. A Huang, “Review of Soil
ards for adults and children, it is observed that the mining site Heavy Metal Pollution from Mines in China: Pollution and Health Risk
Assessment”, Science of the Total Environment 468 (2013) 469.
pose more risk than the control site, and children are at higher [13] X. Qing, Z. Yutong & L. Shenggao, “Assessment of Heavy Metal Pol-
risk than the adults due to their high values. From the results lution and Human Health Risk in Urban Soils of Steel Industrial City
for the three different exposure pathways of metals for children (Anshan), Liaoning, Northeast China, Ecotoxicology and Environmental
and adults, the contributions of HQ are in the order of ingestion Safety 120 (2015) 377.
[14] USEPA, “Example Exposure Scenarios National Center for Environmen-
> dermal > inhalation for As, Cr, Pb, Ni and Zn in the studied tal Assessment”, Washington, DC. EPA/600/R-03/036.National Informa-
mining and control areas for S4. tion Service Springfield, VA; PB2003-103280 (2003).
[15] Y. B Man, X. L. Sun & Y. G. Zhao, “Health risk assessment of aban-
Acknowledgements doned agricultural soils based on heavy metal contents in Hong Kong, the
We wish to thank those who work on the abandoned open world’s most populated city.” Environment International 36 (2010) 6.
[16] Y. Huang, Y. Xia-Li, J. Yang, M. Xu, B. Sun, F. Gao & N. Wang, “Harm-
tin mine tailings site for giving us permission to collect samples ful Chemicals in Soil and Risk Assessment of an Abandoned Open Dump-
for this research. We wish to acknowledge the effort of Godwin site in Eastern China”, Journal of Chemistry Article, 10 (2014) 297686.
Mafuyai and Kelvin Guyit of the department of Natural Sci- [17] M. Fryer, C. D Collins, H. Ferrier, R. N Colvile & M. J. Nieuwenhuijsen
ences, University of Jos, Nigeria for their technical assistance “Human exposure modelling for chemical risk assessment: a review of
current approaches and research and policy implications”, Environmental
in the course of this research work. Science and Policy 9 (2006) 3.
[18] Y. Li, H. Yetang, W. Duojun & Z. Yonhzuan, Determination of free heavy
metal ion concentrations in soils around Cadmium rich Zinc deposit. Geo-
References chemical Journal 13 (2007) 235.
[1] V. Aigbodion, A. Abdulrasheed, S. Olajide, J. Agunsoye & I. Suleiman, [19] B. N Hikon, G. S Ngantem, G. O. Egah & D. D Bwede Assessment of
“Potential of Tin Tailings an Industrial Waste for Refractory Materials”, heavy metals contamination in soils impacted by mining activities in ak-
Journal of Minerals and Materials Characterization and Engineering 9 wana, taraba state, Nigeria - Research journal of Life Sciences Bioinfor-
(2010) 2. matics pharmaceutical and chemical sciences 4 (2018) 5.
[2] A. O. Dada, F. A. Adekola & E. O. Odebunmi, “Kinetics, mecha- [20] E. Berrezueta & R. Castroviejo, “Automated microscopic characterization
nism, isotherm and thermodynamic studies of liquid-phase adsorption of of metallic ores with image analysis”, Review Metal Journal 43 (2007)
Pb2+ onto wood activated carbon supported zerovalent iron (WAC-ZVI) 294.
nanocomposite”, Cogent Chemistry 3 (2017) 1351653 [21] A. Ayeshamarian, C. Sanjeeviraja & R. S. Perumal, “Synthesis, Struc-
[3] D. D. Bwede, R. A. Wuana, M.E. Khan, G. O. Egah, A. U. Itodo & E. B. tural and optical characterizations of SNO2 Nanoparticles”, Journal on
Duwong, “Physicochemical Characterization and Assessment of Ecolog- Photonics and Spintronics 2 (2013) 2324.
ical Risk of Heavy Metals in Tin Mine Tailings in Riyom Local Govern- [22] E. Ogah, G. O. Egah, P. A. Neji, F. T. Samoh, J. D. Dodo, C. O. Anidobu,
ment Area of Plateau State, Nigeria, Journal of Environmental Analytical S. K Amee & D. D. Bwede, “Analysis of heavy metal concentration in
Chemistry 6 (2019) 3. auto-mechanic dumpsites in Makurdi Metropolis, North Central Nige-
[4] E. I. B. Chopin & B. J. Alloway, “Distribution and Mobility of Trace ria”, Journal of Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology 12 (2020)
Elements in soils and vegetation around the mining and smelting areas of 1. DOI:10.5897/JECE2020.0463.
Tharsis, Riotinto and Huelva, Ibrerian Pyrite Belt, SW Spain”, Air and [23] E. I. Uwah, N. P. Ndahi & V. O. Ogugbuaja, ‘’Study of the levels of
Soil Pollution 182 (2007) 1. some agricultural pollutants in soils and waterleaf (Talinum triangulare)
[5] I. G. E. Ibeanu, “Tin mining and ore processing in Nigeria: cause for obtained in Maiduguri, Nigeria’’. Journal of Applied Science in Environ-
concern”, Journal of Environmental. Radioactivity 64 (2003). mental Sanitation 4 (2009) 2.
[6] G. O. Egah, B. N. Hikon, G. S. Ngantem, E. A. Yerima, M. Omovo, [24] Z. Monika & M. Romic Soil contamination by trace metals. Geochemical
E. Ogah, F. A. Aminu, “Synergistic Study of Hydroxyiron (III) and behavior as an element of Risk assessment, Journal of Earth and Environ-
Kaolinite Composite for the Adsorptive Removal of Phenol and Cad- mental Science 3 (2011) 34.
mium’’, International Journal of Environmental Chemistry 3 (2019) 1. [25] A. D. K Banerjee, “Heavy metal levels and solid phase speciation in street
doi: 10.11648/j.ijec.20190301.15. dusts of Delhi, India”, Journal of Environmental Pollution 123 (2003) 1.
[7] B. Chen, H. Qiu, Y. Guo, L. Wang & X. Wang, “Heavy metal contamina- [26] N. Adimalla & H. Wang, “Distribution, contamination, and health risk
tion and health risk assessment in the zinc mine set area of Youxi, China”, assessment of heavy metals in surface soils from northern Telangana, In-
Journal of Xiamen University (Natural Science) 51 (2012) 2. dia”, Arabian Journal of Geosciences 11 (2018) 684.
[8] A. O. Dada, F. A. Adekola & E. O. Odebunmi, “Kinetics and Equilibrium [27] C. S. Qu, Z. W. Ma, J. Yang, Y. Liu, J. Bi & L. Huang, “Human Ex-
Models for Sorption of Cu(II) onto a Novel Manganese Nano-Adsorbent”, posure Pathways of Heavy Metals in a Lead-Zinc Mining Area, Jiangsu
Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology 37 (2015) 1 Province”, China. Plos One 7 (2012) 11
[9] J. A. R. Martı́n, C. Gutiérrez, M. Escuer, M. T. Garcı́a-González, R. [28] V. M Ngole-Jeme & P. Fantke, “Ecological and human health risk as-
Campos-Herrera & N Águila, “Effect of mine tailing on the spatial vari- sociated with abounded gold mining contaminated soil”, Review Metal
ability of soil nematodes from lead pollution in La Union (Spain)”, Sci- Journal 42 (2017) 100.
ence of the Total Environment 473 (2014) 474.

413