Biomonitoring, status and source risk assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) by using honeybees, pine tree leaves and propolis evaluated by HPLC and principle component analysis

Samples were gathered from five stations in the “Bozkoy” village, Aliaga industrial districts of Izmir (Turkey) during April-May 2014 to quantify and identify the sources of airborne polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in honeybee, pine tree leaves and propolis as bio-indicators. PAHs concentrations varied from 261.18 µgkg-1 in dry weight (dw) to 553.33 µg kg-1dw in honeybees, 138.57 µg kg-1dw to 853.67 µg kg-1dw in pine leaves and 798.61 µg kg-1dw to 2905.53 µg kg-1dw in propolis samples. Total PAHs concentrations were ranked as propolis pine leaves honeybees. Ring sequence pattern was, 5 3 6 4 2 for honeybees, 5 3 4 6 2 for pine leaves, and 5 4 6 3 2 for propolis. The diagnostic ratios [Fluoranthene/ fluoranthene + pyrene], [indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene/ indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene + benzo(g,h,i)perylene] and [benzo(a)anthracene/benzo(a)anthracene + chrysene] indicated that coal and biomass combustion was dominant PAHs source in the study area. Fluoranthene considered as characteristic PAH compound in bio-monitoring of airborne PAHs via honeybee. Distribution maps of different number of rings for PAHs among sampling sites showed advantages of honeybee samples as better indicator due to its capability to providing wider information to interpose heavier pollutants which normally are not in gas - or - suspended phase for long time. In the result of correlation, Factor analysis and Principal Components Analysis (PCA), potential sources of PAHs pollution in pine leaves and honeybees considered as airborne emission; but propolis contaminated by PAHs, due to replacement of herbal sources for resins by unnatural gummy substances from paving materials (e.g. asphalt and tar leaks).