Premium
Perils of categorical thinking: “Oxic/anoxic” conceptual model in environmental remediation
Author(s) -
Bradley Paul M.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
remediation journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.762
H-Index - 27
eISSN - 1520-6831
pISSN - 1051-5658
DOI - 10.1002/rem.21317
Subject(s) - anoxic waters , oxygen , environmental chemistry , biodegradation , chemistry , environmental remediation , microcosm , limiting oxygen concentration , electron acceptor , contamination , biochemical oxygen demand , detection limit , chemical oxygen demand , environmental science , environmental engineering , ecology , photochemistry , chromatography , wastewater , organic chemistry , biology
Given ambient atmospheric oxygen concentrations of about 21 percent (by volume), the lower limit for reliable quantitation of dissolved oxygen concentrations in groundwater samples is in the range of 0.1–0.5 mg/L. Frameworks for assessing in situ redox condition are often applied using a simple two‐category (oxic/anoxic) model of oxygen condition. The “oxic” category defines the environmental range in which dissolved oxygen concentrations are clearly expected to impact contaminant biodegradation, either by supporting aerobic biodegradation of electron‐donor contaminants like petroleum hydrocarbons or by inhibiting anaerobic biodegradation of electron‐acceptor contaminants like chloroethenes. The tendency to label the second category “anoxic” leads to an invalid assumption that oxygen is insignificant when, in fact, the dissolved oxygen concentration is less than detection but otherwise unknown. Expressing dissolved oxygen concentrations as numbers of molecules per volume, dissolved oxygen concentrations that fall below the 0.1 mg/L field detection limit range from 1 to 10 17 molecules/L. In light of recent demonstrations of substantial oxygen‐linked biodegradation of chloroethene contaminants at dissolved oxygen concentrations well below the 0.1–0.5 mg/L field detection limit, characterizing “less than detection” oxygen concentrations as “insignificant” is invalid. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.