Next Article in Journal
Biomass Production and Metal Remediation by Salix alba L. and Salix viminalis L. Irrigated with Greywater Treated by Floating Wetlands
Previous Article in Journal
Low Abundant Bacteria Reflect Soil Specificity—Analysis of Bacterial Communities from Archaeological Investigation of Pre-Industrial Saline Ash Deposits of Bad Dürrenberg (Germany)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Environments
Volume 11
Issue 3
10.3390/environments11030043
environments-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Lead (Pb) Pollution in Soil: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Contamination Grade and Health Risk in Mexico

by
Jorge Briseño-Bugarín
†,
Xelha Araujo-Padilla
†,
Victor Manuel Escot-Espinoza
,
Jaime Cardoso-Ortiz
,
Juan Armando Flores de la Torre
and
Argelia López-Luna
*
Laboratorio de Toxicología y Farmacia, Área de Ciencias de la Salud, Unidad Académica de Ciencias Químicas, Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas, Zacatecas 98160, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Environments 2024, 11(3), 43; https://doi.org/10.3390/environments11030043
Submission received: 4 January 2024 / Revised: 18 February 2024 / Accepted: 19 February 2024 / Published: 25 February 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Lead (Pb) is a toxic metal associated with several health disorders. The mining and Pb battery industry are related to Pb increase in air, water, and soil. Mexico is an important worldwide Pb producer; however, reviews on environmental Pb contamination in Mexico are insufficient. Since Pb remains stable in soil and its concentration is an indicator of Pb exposure, this systematic review focused on reports of Pb concentrations in soil from Mexico published in 2010–2023. The retrieved reports were ordered, and contamination grade and health risk were estimated for location. From 36 retrieved reports, 24 were associated with mining Pb pollution, while a unique report mentioned the battery industry. The publications evaluated mining (13), agricultural (11), and residential (16) soils. Pb concentrations in soil were higher than the allowed limits in more than half of the reports. According to the Pb concentrations in soil, the locations evaluated in Mexico presented a contamination grade from heavily contaminated to extremely contaminated and health risks results suggested severe hazards, particularly for children. This work can guide other researchers to identify potentially contaminated but understudied Mexican locations.

1. Introduction

Based on toxicity and potential for human exposure, lead (Pb) is among the 10 chemicals of public health concern according to the World Health Organization (WHO) [1] and is the second on the Substance Priority List 2022 of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) [2]. Although Pb naturally occurs in the Earth’s crust, anthropogenic sources, namely mining, ores smelting, coal burning, and the battery industry, release Pb into the air, soil, and/or water [3]. In the soil, speciation and mobility of Pb depends on soil composition since Pb may occur as a free metal ion or complexed with inorganic and organic constituents [4]. Galena (PbS) is the most common ore mineral because Pb has high affinity with sulfur [5]. Soil components such as hydrous ferric oxide (HFO) and organic matter increase the soil’s surface capacity to adsorb Pb [6]. Since Pb in soil remains stable for a long time, it may bioaccumulate in plants and agricultural products generating food chain contamination [7]. Concentration of Pb in soil from urban areas is an indicator of community Pb exposure [8]. In humans, Pb exposure occurs through ingestion of contaminated water and food, dust inhalation, and dermal contact [9], and is related to early life effects like preterm birth, in utero growth restriction, decreased birth weight, birth defects, and cognitive impairment and results in delayed onset of diseases such as obesity, infertility, cancer, metabolic alteration, autoimmune disorder, mental disease, and cardiovascular and neurodegenerative disorders [10].
Since Pb is malleable, ductile, and resistant to corrosion [11], it has been widely used in the battery industry, machinery manufacturing, and medicine, resulting in increased world Pb production [12]. Refined Pb has been obtained from mined ore since ancient times, but since the early 1980s, it has also been recovered from used Pb products (e.g., Pb-acid batteries) by secondary smelting [13]. China, Australia, and the United States (US) are, respectively, the first-, second-, and third-largest world producers of Pb according to the US Geological Survey [14]. Concentrations of Pb in soil have been evaluated in China [15,16], Australia [17,18,19], and the US [20,21], highlighting the grade of Pb contamination in these countries. Mexico was the fourth-largest world producer of Pb in 2022 [14] and the first Pb ore exporter in 2021 conforming to The Observatory of Economic Complexity [22]. The political division of México consists of 32 states (Figure 1): nine states, namely Coahuila (COA), Durango (DUR), Guerrero (GRO), Morelos (MOR), Oaxaca (OAX), Querétaro (QUE), Sinaloa (SIN), Sonora (SON) and Zacatecas (ZAC), have been Pb mining producers [23]; five states, such as Baja California Norte (BCN), Nuevo León (NLE), Puebla (PUE), Tamaulipas (TAM), and Tlaxcala (TLA), produce Pb by secondary smelting from Pb-acid batteries [24]; and eight states, including Aguascalientes (AGU), Chihuahua (CHH), Estado de México (MEX), Guanajuato (GUA), Hidalgo (HID), Jalisco (JAL), Michoacán (MIC), and San Luis Potosí (SLP), produce Pb by mining and Pb battery recycling facilities [23,24]. Since both activities are distributed in the Mexican territory and they are related to environmental contamination as well as health risks, it is relevant to review the studies of Pb pollution performed in Mexico. However, reviews focused on Pb contamination in the entire Mexican territory are scarce. Thus, this systematic review aimed to collect reports from 2010 to 2023 regarding Pb and soil in Mexican territory. Additionally, we conducted a meta-analysis of contamination grade and health risk in Mexican states to uncover underserved regions.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Search Strategy

The research questions of this study were: “In which Mexican states has Pb been quantified in soil?” and “What are the Pb contamination levels and the health risk at these sites?”. Thus, our systematic review focused on studies of Pb quantification in Mexican soil following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [25]. The inclusion criteria were (1) reports of Pb quantification in Mexican soil, (2) original research articles, (3) articles published from January 2010 to May 2023, and (4) works written in English or Spanish language. Exclusion criteria were (1) Pb isotope identification, (2) studies of non-Mexican soil samples, and (3) reviews or non-research articles. The search strategy consisted of using the keywords and Boolean operators “Lead OR Pb OR Plumbum AND Soil AND Mexico” in the research databases PubMed and ScienceDirect. Publication date and language filters were adjusted as January 2010 to May 2023 and English or Spanish.

2.2. Data Collection and Categorization

Data search, collection, and analysis were performed from March to June 2023. Titles and abstracts were reviewed, selecting publications by the inclusion and exclusion criteria described in Section 2.1. Data such as sampling location and method, sample size, and Pb quantification procedure were obtained from material and methods, while Pb concentrations were extracted from the results. The information retrieved was organized into three categories (mining, agricultural, and residential) according to the land use where the sampling was performed.

2.3. Data Analysis

2.3.1. Contamination Grade by Geoaccumulation Index (Igeo)

The geoaccumulation index (Igeo) allows us to estimate the Pb contamination grade in soil based on a reference value and the concentration measured in a soil sample [26]. We estimated Igeo for each concentration using the formula described by Muller (1969) [27]:
Igeo = log2 (Cs/1.5Bs)
where Cs is the Pb (mg/kg) quantified in soil and Bs is the geochemical background (27 mg/kg) obtained from the global soil background values [28], while 1.5 was used as a correction factor. The mean, median, or maximum Pb concentration was used for Igeo estimation (Tables S1–S3). When two or more authors mentioned the same location, the Igeo average was obtained. The Igeo value and its respective contamination grade are described in Table 1.

2.3.2. Contamination Grade by Ecological Risk Index (ERI)

The ecological risk index (ERI) represents the risk of affecting living organisms and the environment with a toxic metal, evaluating the sensitivity of different ecosystems to toxic contaminants [29]. The ERI was estimated using the following formula [30]:
ERI = [(Ts)(Cs)]/Bs
where Ts indicates the Pb toxicity factor equal to five reported by Hakanson (1980) [30], Bs is the Pb background in soil (27 mg/kg), and Cs represents the Pb concentration measured in the soil. The ERI for each report was estimated (Tables S1–S3) using the mean, median, or maximum Pb concentration. The ERI depicts the risk as low (≤50), moderate (50–100), high (100–150), very high (150–200), and extreme (>200).

2.3.3. Statistical Analysis of Contamination Grade

To compare the contamination grade among mining, agricultural, and residential land uses, the Igeo and ERI values were averaged per land use and analyzed by One Way Analysis of Variance on Ranks. Statistical analysis and graphs were performed in SigmaPlot 12.0.

2.3.4. Health Risk by Exposure Estimation

The health risk assessment estimates the possible adverse health effects in people exposed to pollutants [31]. Non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic effects are included in a health risk evaluation considering the pollutant exposure grade. Since Pb exposure occurs via oral, dermal, and inhalation routes, the average daily intake (ADI) of Pb was determined for each route. The mean, median, or maximum Pb concentration in the range was used to estimate the ADI for each report. The ADIs were calculated for both adults and children using the formulas and parameters in Table 2 reported by Kan et al. (2021) [15]:
ADIoral = [(Cs)(IR)(ED)(EF)(FI)]/[(BW)(AT)] × 10−6
ADIdermal = [(Cs)(SA)(AF)(ABS)(ED)(EF)]/[(BW)(AT)] × 10−6
ADIinhalation = [(Cs)(ED)(EF)(ET)]/[(PEF)(BW)(AT)]

2.3.5. Non-Carcinogenic and Carcinogenic Risk Assessments

The non-carcinogenic risk was estimated separately for oral, dermal, and inhalation exposures by the target hazard quotient (THQ) using the following formula:
THQ = ADI/RfD
where ADI is the value obtained in Section 2.3.4 for each exposure route and RfD corresponds to a reference Pb dose. RfDs were 0.0035, 0.000525, and 0.00352 mg/kg/day for oral, dermal, and inhalation routes, respectively [32,33]. The hazard index (HI) was estimated by adding the oral, dermal, and inhalation THQ values. The HI (Tables S1–S3) evaluates the general non-carcinogenic risk. HI < 1 indicates a lower probability of non-carcinogenic effects, HI > 1 represents a greater possibility of non-carcinogenic effects, and HI > 10 suggests a serious chronic health impact.
The carcinogenic risk was calculated for oral exposure by the cancer risk index (CRI) using the following formula:
CRI = ADIoral (CSF)
where ADIoral was obtained in Section 2.3.4 and CSF (0.0085 mg/kg/day) depicts the cancer risk per unit of Pb dose (i.e., cancer slope factor) [33]. CRI was estimated for each location based on Pb concentration (Tables S1–S3). The permissible CRI value is 1 × 10−6 for a single carcinogenic metal [34].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Reports Retrieved

The identification, screening, and selection of reports are described in Figure 2. From 40,079 reports, 39,729 were excluded by automatic filters, 350 were manually screened, and 36 were selected for this study. All 36 follow the guidelines of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and/or the Mexican regulation NMX-AA-132-SCFI-2006 [35] for sample collection as well as for Pb determination. Sampling was carried out from 0 to 30 cm deep as the official guidelines indicate. The methods for Pb quantification included flame atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS), atomic absorption spectrometry with graphite furnace (AAS-GF), inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES), and X-ray fluorescence (XRF).
A total of 13 reports evaluated soil from mines or tailings, 14 analyzed agricultural or residential areas related to mining, 11 identified Pb in agricultural or residential soil but in relation to other sources than mining, and a unique report evaluated Pb on residential land in relation to a battery factory in NLE. In recent years, the number of Pb battery recycling facilities has increased in Mexico. Since environmental pollution caused by this activity has becoming more frequent, it is necessary studies of environmental risks associated with this activity for achieving pollution control [36].

3.2. Data Collected

The information collected was organized into mining, agricultural, and residential soils. Figure 3 depicts Mexican states related to mining (2010–2022) and/or Pb battery recycling, reports number per state, and the land use mentioned. Mexican states related to Pb mentioned in the reports were AGU, BCN, CHH, COA, DUR, GRO, GUA, HID, MOR, NLE, PUE, QUE, SLP, SON, TLA, and ZAC. Soil from “San Antonio” and “Ensenada de Muertos” mines in Baja California Sur (BCS) was evaluated by Méndez-Rodríguez and Alvarez-Castañeda (2016) [37], but we did not find data on Pb production in the Mexican National Institute of Statistic and Geography [23]. However, an official government report indicates that BCS had its last Pb production in 1957 [38]. In contrast, no reports from OAX and SIN, Pb mining producers; TAM, Pb battery recycler; and JAL, MEX, and MIC, with both mines and recycling facilities, were found using the search strategy described in Section 2.1. Totals of 13, 11, and 16 reports described mining, agricultural, and residential soil samples, respectively. The most studied state was SLP, with ten reports by diverse authors, followed by HID, mentioned in five reports, SON, reported by four authors, CHH, by three, and COA, DUR, GRO, NLE, QUE, and ZAC with two publications each, while AGU, BCN, BCS, GUA, MOR, PUE, and TLA were studied in one report each. Interestingly, ZAC and CHH had few reports considering that both produce a greater amount of Pb than SLP [23]. From all retrieved reports, the Pb concentration in soil was registered and ordered in tables by land use, then contamination grade and health risk were determined for each report.

3.3. Lead (Pb) Concentrations in Mining, Agricultural, and Residential Land

The uncontaminated soil presents an average of 16 mg Pb/kg, with a range from 2 to 200 mg Pb/kg [39]. The official environmental regulations in each country determine the maximum permissible concentration of Pb in soil. The Mexican Norm NOM-147-SEMARNAT-2004 permits 800 mg Pb/kg for mining soil and 400 mg Pb/kg for both agricultural and residential land [40]. Table 3 summarizes the mining/tailing studies where the highest Pb concentration was 21,288 mg/kg, identified in San Felipe de Jesús (SON), a value 26.6-fold higher than Mexican standards. Loredo-Portales et al. (2020) [41] reported that the analyzed tailing is located 0.5 km from San Felipe de Jesus, a small town with approximately 400 inhabitants. They also evaluated agricultural soil nearby, identifying 1673.3 mg Pb/kg, a concentration 4.2 times higher than the Mexican norm. In Table 4, Vetagrande (ZAC) was the locality with the highest Pb concentration (7516.6 mg Pb/kg) in agricultural soil, 18.8-fold higher than the allowed limit. The authors Barajas-Aceves and Rodríguez-Vázquez (2013) mention that in Vetagrande soil, bean, corn, and chili has been cultivated for 24 years [42]. Regarding residential areas, 21,179 mg Pb/kg was quantified <1.5 km from a Pb smelter in Torreón (COA), exceeding the standard value by 52.9 times (Table 5). To evaluate the Pb impact on locations, the contamination grade and the human health risk were calculated for each report.

3.3.1. Contamination Grade in Mining, Agricultural, and Residential Land

Pollution monitoring is important to assess the exposure risk for humans and ecosystems, particularly in mines or industrial zones [76]. In Figure 4, the contamination grade is represented by Igeo and ERI values obtained for mining, agricultural, and residential land in Mexico. Mining land locations, namely Cerro de San Pedro, Cedral, Charcas, San Felipe de Jesús, and Vetagrande, were extremely contaminated (Igeo > 5) with extreme ecological risk (ERI > 200). Residential areas and ecosystems surrounding mines or storage tailings have environmental risks attributable to pollutant releases, groundwater contamination by leakages, or failures in tailing dams [77]. Indeed, agricultural soil from San Felipe de Jesús and Vetagrande presented extreme contamination, confirming possible pollutant distribution from mines or tailings to nearby areas. Agricultural soil near mines accumulates polluting compounds and eventually contaminates crops [78], representing a potential risk to human health [79]; the Mexican norm allows 400 mg Pb/kg in agricultural soil, while Canadian standards recommend 140 mg Pb/kg as a maximum limit [80]. High Pb concentration in soil suggests an increase in the metal mobility and a higher probability of bioaccumulation. Muñoz et al. (2021) identified, in Vetagrande (ZAC), vegetables with Pb concentrations greater than the limits (0.1 mg Pb/kg) established by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); the vegetables analyzed by Muñoz were garlic (Allium sativum, 3.0 mg Pb/kg), carrot (Daucus carota, 5.0 mg Pb/kg), and bell pepper (Capsicum annuum, 9.6 mg Pb/kg) [81].
Contamination evaluated in residential areas was related to the industry (Pb smelter, battery factory, brick kiln, etc.), pottery, traffic paint, and volcano proximity. One clear example is the extreme contamination and ecological risk determined in Chihuahua and Torreón related to Pb smelter facilities. Localities with extremely contaminated mining land, namely Cerro de San Pedro and Villa de la Paz, also presented extreme contamination and ecological risk in residential areas. We analyzed if contamination grade was related to land-use, and results indicated that there is no significant difference among contamination in mining, agricultural, and residential soils (Figure S1). The contamination grade and ecological risk identified in the entire Mexican territory are showed in Figure 4.

3.3.2. Health Risk in Mining, Agricultural, and Residential Land

The health risk was determined by the non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic risks. The health risks for adults and children were estimated, ordered by land use, and are summarized in Table 6. Localities extremely contaminated (Figure 4) presented a HI value > 10 for children, suggesting a serious non-carcinogenic risk. Children are particularly vulnerable because they gastrointestinally absorb Pb efficiently, spend time on dusty floors, and are exposed by hand–mouth behavior [82]. Exposure to Pb in early life is associated with metabolic syndrome [83], nervous system disorders, kidney and liver damage, auditory impairment, gastrointestinal alterations, decreased intelligence quotient, and behavioral disorders [84]. Particularly, residential zones such as Trinidad Tenexyecac, Cerro de San Pedro, Morales, Torreon, and Chihuahua should be monitored to confirm such risk in children. Non-carcinogenic risk for adults was mostly interpreted as a greater possibility of non-carcinogenic effects; Pb in adults is related to Alzheimer’s disease, reproductive toxicity, and progression of cancer [85]. Finally, the carcinogenic risk was evaluated in mining, agricultural, and residential zones. The results represented in Table 6 as CRI values exceeded the recommended value for a single carcinogenic metal. The population living in areas close to mines and areas of Pb smelting and brick pottery presented higher CRI values. Of all the reports, “El Sargento” town, Los Planes, Baja California Sur, located to 10 km from a mine, did not present a cancer risk.

4. Conclusions

In this systematic review, we retrieved 36 reports of Pb quantification in mining, agricultural, and residential soil in Mexico. Interestingly, the reports mentioned 16 Mexican states out of 22 related to Pb mining and/or Pb battery recycling. Most of the reports correlated the Pb concentration in soil with mining, whereas a unique article mentioned the battery industry. San Luis Potosí (SLP) was the most reported state. The meta-analysis performed allowed us to identify extreme Pb contamination grades in residential land from Cerro de San Pedro and Villa de la Paz in SLP, Chihuahua in Chihuahua, and Torreon in Coahuila, while in studies of agricultural soil, extreme contamination was recognized in Cerro de San Pedro, Cedral, Charcas, and Villa de la Paz (SLP), San Felipe de Jesús in Sonora, and Vetagrande in Zacatecas. Contamination grades coincide with a high health risk, particularly for children. Thus, the results presented in our work can guide other researchers and Mexican authorities to identify regions in the Mexican territory that require attention and immediate remediation in order to reduce the health risks in the Mexican population.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/environments11030043/s1, Figure S1: Igeo and ERI values (a and b, respectively) averaged and graphed to compare Pb contamination by land uses; Table S1: Indexes of geoaccumulation, ecological risk, hazard, and cancer risk in mining/tailing soils; Table S2: Indexes of geoaccumulation, ecological risk, hazard, and cancer risk in agricultural soils; Table S3: Indexes of geoaccumulation, ecological risk, hazard, and cancer risk in residential soils.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.B.-B., X.A.-P. and A.L.-L.; methodology, J.B.-B. and X.A.-P.; software, V.M.E.-E.; validation, J.A.F.d.l.T. and A.L.-L.; formal analysis, J.B.-B. and X.A.-P.; investigation, J.B.-B. and X.A.-P.; resources, A.L.-L.; data curation, J.B.-B. and X.A.-P.; writing—original draft preparation, J.B.-B. and X.A.-P.; writing—review and editing, J.B.-B. and X.A.-P.; visualization, J.C.-O. and J.A.F.d.l.T.; supervision, J.B.-B. and A.L.-L.; project administration, A.L.-L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

All the datasets are not publicly available due to the large amount of data collected; however, specific datasets are available upon request to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the Consejo Nacional de Humanidades, Ciencias y Tecnologías (Conahcyt) postdoctoral fellowship given to J.B-B, (CVU 703216), X. A-P. (CVU 331982) and V. M. E-E. (CVU 416160).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. World Health Organization (WHO). Exposure to Lead: A Major Public Health Concern. In Preventing Disease through Healthy Environments; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021; p. 6. [Google Scholar]
  2. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ATSDR’s Substance Priority List. Available online: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/spl/index.html#2022spl (accessed on 11 August 2023).
  3. Collin, M.S.; Venkatraman, S.K.; Vijayakumar, N.; Kanimozhi, V.; Arbaaz, S.M.; Stacey, R.G.S.; Anusha, J.; Choudhary, R.; Lvov, V.; Tovar, G.I.; et al. Bioaccumulation of Lead (Pb) and Its Effects on Human: A Review. J. Hazard. Mater. Adv. 2022, 7, 100094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Kushwaha, A.; Hans, N.; Kumar, S.; Rani, R. A Critical Review on Speciation, Mobilization and Toxicity of Lead in Soil-Microbe-Plant System and Bioremediation Strategies. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 147, 1035–1045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Martn, F.; Simn, M.; Garca, I.; Romero, A.; Gonzlez, V. Pollution of Pb in Soils Affected by Pyrite Tailings: Influence of Soil Properties. In Environmental Risk Assessment of Soil Contamination; InTech: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  6. Chaney, R.; Mielke, H.; Sterrett, S. Speciation, Mobility, and Bioavailability of Soil Lead. In Proceedings of the Lead in Soils: Issues and Guidelines. Environ. Geochem. Health 1989, 11, 105–129. [Google Scholar]
  7. Kumar, S.; Islam, R.; Akash, P.B.; Khan, M.H.R.; Proshad, R.; Karmoker, J.; MacFarlane, G.R. Lead (Pb) Contamination in Agricultural Products and Human Health Risk Assessment in Bangladesh. Water Air Soil. Pollut. 2022, 233, 257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Haque, E.; Thorne, P.S.; Nghiem, A.A.; Yip, C.S.; Bostick, B.C. Lead (Pb) Concentrations and Speciation in Residential Soils from an Urban Community Impacted by Multiple Legacy Sources. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 416, 125886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Li, J.; Hao, G.; Wang, X.; Ruan, L.; Zhou, J. Anthropogenic Pb Contribution in Soils of Southeast China Estimated by Pb Isotopic Ratios. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 22232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Shiek, S.S.; Mani, M.S.; Kabekkodu, S.P.; Dsouza, H.S. Health Repercussions of Environmental Exposure to Lead: Methylation Perspective. Toxicology 2021, 461, 152927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. In Inorganic and Organic Lead Compounds; IARC Publications: Lyon, France, 2006; Volume 87. [Google Scholar]
  12. Gutiérrez Pérez, V.H.; Osorio Hernández, J.D.; Sánchez Alvarado, R.G.; Cruz Ramírez, A.; Olvera Vázquez, S.L.; Rivera Salinas, J.E. Lead Recovery from a Lead Concentrate throughout Direct Smelting Reduction Process with Mixtures of Na2CO3 and SiC to 1000 °C. Metals 2021, 12, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Lopez, N.B.N.; Li, J.; Wilson, B. A Study of the Geographical Shifts in Global Lead Production—A Possible Corresponding Shift in Potential Threats to the Environment. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 107, 237–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. United States Geological Survey (USGS). National Minerals Information Center Lead Statistics and Information. Available online: https://www.usgs.gov/centers/national-minerals-information-center/lead-statistics-and-information (accessed on 20 August 2023).
  15. Kan, X.; Dong, Y.; Feng, L.; Zhou, M.; Hou, H. Contamination and Health Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals in China’s Lead–Zinc Mine Tailings: A Meta–Analysis. Chemosphere 2021, 267, 128909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Lu, X.; Yang, Q.; Wang, H.; Zhu, Y. A Global Meta-Analysis of the Correlation between Soil Physicochemical Properties and Lead Bioaccessibility. J. Hazard. Mater. 2023, 453, 131440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Laidlaw, M.A.S.; Mohmmad, S.M.; Gulson, B.L.; Taylor, M.P.; Kristensen, L.J.; Birch, G. Estimates of Potential Childhood Lead Exposure from Contaminated Soil Using the US EPA IEUBK Model in Sydney, Australia. Environ. Res. 2017, 156, 781–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Markus, J.; McBratney, A.B. A Review of the Contamination of Soil with Lead. Environ. Int. 2001, 27, 399–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Laidlaw, M.A.S.; Gordon, C.; Taylor, M.P.; Ball, A.S. Estimates of Potential Childhood Lead Exposure from Contaminated Soil Using the USEPA IEUBK Model in Melbourne, Australia. Environ. Geochem. Health 2018, 40, 2785–2793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Datko-Williams, L.; Wilkie, A.; Richmond-Bryant, J. Analysis of U.S. Soil Lead (Pb) Studies from 1970 to 2012. Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 468–469, 854–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Brown, S.L.; Chaney, R.L.; Hettiarachchi, G.M. Lead in Urban Soils: A Real or Perceived Concern for Urban Agriculture? J. Environ. Qual. 2016, 45, 26–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. The Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC) Lead Ore in Mexico. Available online: https://oec.world/en/profile/bilateral-product/lead-ore/reporter/mex (accessed on 20 August 2023).
  23. INEGI Economía y Sectores Productivos. Available online: https://www.inegi.org.mx/temas/mineria/ (accessed on 20 August 2023).
  24. Secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). Hazardous Trade?: An Examination of US-Generated Spent Lead-Acid Battery Exports and Secondary Lead Recycling in Canada, Mexico, and the United States; Secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC): Montreal, QC, Canada, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  25. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Oudeika, M.S.; Altinoğlu, F.F.; Akbay, F.; Aydin, A. Heavy Metal Contamination of Topsoil in Denizli Organized Industrial Zone, Western Anatolia, Turkey. Arab. J. Geosci. 2021, 14, 720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Muller, G. Index of Geoaccumulation in Sediments of the Rhine River. GeoJournal 1969, 2, 109–118. [Google Scholar]
  28. Kabata-Pendias, A. Trace Elements in Soils and Plants, 4th ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis Group: Abingdon, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  29. Saha, A.; Gupta, B.S.; Patidar, S.; Martínez-Villegas, N. Evaluation of Potential Ecological Risk Index of Toxic Metals Contamination in the Soils. In Proceedings of the IOCAG 2022, Online, 10 February 2022; MDPI: Basel Switzerland, 2022; p. 59. [Google Scholar]
  30. Hakanson, L. An Ecological Risk Index for Aquatic Pollution Control.a Sedimentological Approach. Water Res. 1980, 14, 975–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Human Health Risk Assessment. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/risk/human-health-risk-assessment#tab-1 (accessed on 17 February 2024).
  32. Jiang, Y.; Chao, S.; Liu, J.; Yang, Y.; Chen, Y.; Zhang, A.; Cao, H. Source Apportionment and Health Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals in Soil for a Township in Jiangsu Province, China. Chemosphere 2017, 168, 1658–1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Cheng, Z.; Chen, L.-J.; Li, H.-H.; Lin, J.-Q.; Yang, Z.-B.; Yang, Y.-X.; Xu, X.-X.; Xian, J.-R.; Shao, J.-R.; Zhu, X.-M. Characteristics and Health Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals Exposure via Household Dust from Urban Area in Chengdu, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 619–620, 621–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Tepanosyan, G.; Maghakyan, N.; Sahakyan, L.; Saghatelyan, A. Heavy Metals Pollution Levels and Children Health Risk Assessment of Yerevan Kindergartens Soils. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2017, 142, 257–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT) NMX-AA-132-SCFI-2006, Muestreo de Suelos para la Identificación y la Cuantificación de Metales y Metaloides, y Manejo de la Muestra. Available online: https://biblioteca.semarnat.gob.mx/janium/Documentos/Ciga/agenda/PPD02/NMX132AA2006.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2023).
  36. Gao, X.; Zhou, Y.; Fan, M.; Jiang, M.; Zhang, M.; Cai, H.; Wang, X. Environmental Risk Assessment near a Typical Spent Lead-Acid Battery Recycling Factory in China. Environ. Res. 2023, 233, 116417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Méndez-Rodríguez, L.C.; Alvarez-Castañeda, S.T. Assessment of Trace Metals in Soil, Vegetation and Rodents in Relation to Metal Mining Activities in an Arid Environment. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2016, 97, 44–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Servicio Geológico Mexicano (SGM) Consulta Los Panoramas Mineros Estatales. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/sgm/es/articulos/consulta-los-panoramas-mineros-estatales (accessed on 21 August 2023).
  39. Liu, X.; Ju, Y.; Mandzhieva, S.; Pinskii, D.; Minkina, T.; Rajput, V.D.; Roane, T.; Huang, S.; Li, Y.; Ma, L.Q.; et al. Sporadic Pb Accumulation by Plants: Influence of Soil Biogeochemistry, Microbial Community and Physiological Mechanisms. J. Hazard. Mater. 2023, 444, 130391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT) Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-147-SEMARNAT/SSA1-2004. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/profepa/documentos/norma-oficial-mexicana-nom-147-semarnat-ssa1-2004 (accessed on 31 May 2023).
  41. Loredo-Portales, R.; Bustamante-Arce, J.; González-Villa, H.N.; Moreno-Rodríguez, V.; Del Rio-Salas, R.; Molina-Freaner, F.; González-Méndez, B.; Archundia-Peralta, D. Mobility and Accessibility of Zn, Pb, and As in Abandoned Mine Tailings of Northwestern Mexico. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 26605–26620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Barajas-Aceves, M.; Rodríguez-Vázquez, R. Effects of Organic Amendments on the Mobility of Pb and Zn from Mine Tailings Added to Semi-Arid Soils. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part B 2013, 48, 226–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Mitchell, K.N.; Ramos Gómez, M.S.; Guerrero Barrera, A.L.; Yamamoto Flores, L.; Flores de la Torre, J.A.; Avelar González, F.J. Evaluation of Environmental Risk of Metal Contaminated Soils and Sediments Near Mining Sites in Aguascalientes, Mexico. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2016, 97, 216–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Armienta, M.A.; Beltrán, M.; Martínez, S.; Labastida, I. Heavy Metal Assimilation in Maize (Zea mays L.) Plants Growing near Mine Tailings. Environ. Geochem. Health 2020, 42, 2361–2375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Mendoza-Hernández, J.C.; Vázquez-Delgado, O.R.; Castillo-Morales, M.; Varela-Caselis, J.L.; Santamaría-Juárez, J.D.; Olivares-Xometl, O.; Arriola Morales, J.; Pérez-Osorio, G. Phytoremediation of Mine Tailings by Brassica Juncea Inoculated with Plant Growth-Promoting Bacteria. Microbiol. Res. 2019, 228, 126308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Guzmán-Rangel, G.; Torres Díaz, A.N.; Pavón Meza, E.L.; Oorts, K.; Smolders, E. Validating the Use of a Toxicity Database for Prediction of Plant Cover and Biodiversity in Multi-Metal Mining-Impacted Soils. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2020, 39, 1826–1838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Saldaña-Villanueva, K.; Pérez-Vázquez, F.J.; Ávila-García, I.P.; Méndez-Rodríguez, K.B.; Carrizalez-Yáñez, L.; Gavilán-García, A.; Vargas-Morales, J.M.; Van-Brussel, E.; Diaz-Barriga, F. A Preliminary Study on Health Impacts of Mexican Mercury Mining Workers in a Context of Precarious Employment. J. Trace Elem. Med. Biol. 2022, 71, 126925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Fernández-Macías, J.C.; González-Mille, D.J.; García-Arreola, M.E.; Cruz-Santiago, O.; Rivero-Pérez, N.E.; Pérez-Vázquez, F.; Ilizaliturri-Hernández, C.A. Integrated Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Sites Contaminated with Arsenic and Lead by Long-Term Mining Liabilities in San Luis Potosi, Mexico. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2020, 197, 110568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Monzalvo-Santos, K.; Alfaro-De la Torre, M.C.; Chapa-Vargas, L.; Castro-Larragoitia, J.; Rodríguez-Estrella, R. Arsenic and Lead Contamination in Soil and in Feathers of Three Resident Passerine Species in a Semi-Arid Mining Region of the Mexican Plateau. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 2016, 51, 825–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Ramos-Garza, J.; Bustamante-Brito, R.; Ángeles de Paz, G.; Medina-Canales, M.G.; Vásquez-Murrieta, M.S.; Wang, E.T.; Rodríguez-Tovar, A.V. Isolation and Characterization of Yeasts Associated with Plants Growing in Heavy-Metal- and Arsenic-Contaminated Soils. Can. J. Microbiol. 2016, 62, 307–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Espinosa-Reyes, G.; González-Mille, D.J.; Ilizaliturri-Hernández, C.A.; Mejía-Saavedra, J.; Cilia-López, V.G.; Costilla-Salazar, R.; Díaz-Barriga, F. Effect of Mining Activities in Biotic Communities of Villa de La Paz, San Luis Potosi, Mexico. Biomed. Res. Int. 2014, 2014, 165046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Peña-Ortega, M.; Del Rio-Salas, R.; Valencia-Sauceda, J.; Mendívil-Quijada, H.; Minjarez-Osorio, C.; Molina-Freaner, F.; de la O-Villanueva, M.; Moreno-Rodríguez, V. Environmental Assessment and Historic Erosion Calculation of Abandoned Mine Tailings from a Semi-Arid Zone of Northwestern Mexico: Insights from Geochemistry and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 26203–26215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Solis-Hernández, A.P.; Chávez-Vergara, B.M.; Rodríguez-Tovar, A.V.; Beltrán-Paz, O.I.; Santillán, J.; Rivera-Becerril, F. Effect of the Natural Establishment of Two Plant Species on Microbial Activity, on the Composition of the Fungal Community, and on the Mitigation of Potentially Toxic Elements in an Abandoned Mine Tailing. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 802, 149788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Ramos, Q.; Armienta, M.A.; Aguayo, A.; Cruz, O. Evaluation of the Interactions of Arsenic (As), Boron (B), and Lead (Pb) from Geothermal Production Wells with Agricultural Soils. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2021, 211, 111843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Cervantes-Trejo, A.; Pinedo-Álvarez, C.; Santellano-Estrada, E.; Cortes-Palacios, L.; Rentería-Villalobos, M. Distribution of Chemical Species in the Water-Soil-Plant (Carya illinoiensis) System near a Mineralization Area in Chihuahua, Mexico—Health Risk Implications. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Núñez-Gastélum, J.A.; Hernández-Carreón, S.; Delgado-Ríos, M.; Flores-Marguez, J.P.; Meza-Montenegro, M.M.; Osorio-Rosas, C.; Cota-Ruiz, K.; Gardea-Torresdey, J.L. Study of Organochlorine Pesticides and Heavy Metals in Soils of the Juarez Valley: An Important Agricultural Region between Mexico and the USA. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 36401–36409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Roque-Álvarez, I.; Sosa-Rodríguez, F.S.; Vazquez-Arenas, J.; Escobedo-Bretado, M.A.; Labastida, I.; Corral-Rivas, J.J.; Aragón-Piña, A.; Armienta, M.A.; Ponce-Peña, P.; Lara, R.H. Spatial Distribution, Mobility and Bioavailability of Arsenic, Lead, Copper and Zinc in Low Polluted Forest Ecosystem in North-Western Mexico. Chemosphere 2018, 210, 320–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Ruiz-Huerta, E.A.; Armienta-Hernández, M.A.; Dubrovsky, J.G.; Gómez-Bernal, J.M. Bioaccumulation of Heavy Metals and As in Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown Close to Mine Tailings Strongly Impacts Plant Development. Ecotoxicology 2022, 31, 447–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Labastida, I.; Mercado, L.A.; Rojas, S.; Barrera, B.; Beltrán, M.; Armienta, M.A.; Lara, R.H.; Luna, R.M. Remediation by Means of EDTA of an Agricultural Calcareous Soil Polluted with Pb. Environ. Geochem. Health 2021, 43, 2231–2242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Carmona-Chit, E.; Carrillo-González, R.; González-Chávez, M.C.A.; Vibrans, H.; Yáñez-Espinosa, L.; Delgado-Alvarado, A. Riparian Plants on Mine Runoff in Zimapan, Hidalgo, Mexico: Useful for Phytoremediation? Int. J. Phytoremediat. 2016, 18, 861–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Meza-Montenegro, M.M.; Gandolfi, A.J.; Santana-Alcántar, M.E.; Klimecki, W.T.; Aguilar-Apodaca, M.G.; Del Río-Salas, R.; De la O-Villanueva, M.; Gómez-Alvarez, A.; Mendivil-Quijada, H.; Valencia, M.; et al. Metals in Residential Soils and Cumulative Risk Assessment in Yaqui and Mayo Agricultural Valleys, Northern Mexico. Sci. Total Environ. 2012, 433, 472–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Flores-Ramírez, R.; Rico-Escobar, E.; Núñez-Monreal, J.E.; García-Nieto, E.; Carrizales, L.; Ilizaliturri-Hernández, C.; Díaz-Barriga, F. Exposición Infantil al Plomo En Sitios Contaminados. Salud Publica Mex. 2012, 54, 383–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Garcia-Vargas, G.G.; Rothenberg, S.J.; Silbergeld, E.K.; Weaver, V.; Zamoiski, R.; Resnick, C.; Rubio-Andrade, M.; Parsons, P.J.; Steuerwald, A.J.; Navas-Acién, A.; et al. Spatial Clustering of Toxic Trace Elements in Adolescents around the Torreón, Mexico Lead–Zinc Smelter. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2014, 24, 634–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Soto-Jiménez, M.F.; Flegal, A.R. Childhood Lead Poisoning from the Smelter in Torreón, México. Environ. Res. 2011, 111, 590–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Sosa-Rodríguez, F.S.; Vazquez-Arenas, J.; Peña, P.P.; Escobedo-Bretado, M.A.; Castellanos-Juárez, F.X.; Labastida, I.; Lara, R.H. Spatial Distribution, Mobility and Potential Health Risks of Arsenic and Lead Concentrations in Semiarid Fine Top-Soils of Durango City, Mexico. Catena 2020, 190, 104540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Peralta, N.; Cantoral, A.; Téllez-Rojo, M.M.; Trejo-Valdivia, B.; Estrada-Sánchez, D.; Richardson-L, V.; Caravanos, J.; Fuller, R. Lead Levels in a Potters Population and Its Association with the Use of Different Glazes: Cross-Sectional Evaluation of the Approved Pottery Program. Front. Toxicol. 2022, 4, 799633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Urrutia-Goyes, R.; Argyraki, A.; Ornelas-Soto, N. Characterization of Soil Contamination by Lead around a Former Battery Factory by Applying an Analytical Hybrid Method. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2018, 190, 429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Orta-García, S.T.; Ochoa-Martinez, A.C.; Carrizalez-Yáñez, L.; Varela-Silva, J.A.; Pérez-Vázquez, F.J.; Pruneda-Álvarez, L.G.; Torres-Dosal, A.; Guzmán-Mar, J.L.; Pérez-Maldonado, I.N. Persistent Organic Pollutants and Heavy Metal Concentrations in Soil from the Metropolitan Area of Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2016, 70, 452–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Rodriguez-Espinosa, P.F.; Jonathan, M.P.; Morales-García, S.S.; Villegas, L.E.C.; Martínez-Tavera, E.; Muñoz-Sevilla, N.P.; Cardona, M.A. Metal Enrichment of Soils Following the April 2012–2013 Eruptive Activity of the Popocatépetl Volcano, Puebla, Mexico. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2015, 187, 717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Martínez-Toledo, Á.; González-Mille, D.J.; García-Arreola, M.E.; Cruz-Santiago, O.; Trejo-Acevedo, A.; Ilizaliturri-Hernández, C.A. Patterns in Utilization of Carbon Sources in Soil Microbial Communities Contaminated with Mine Solid Wastes from San Luis Potosi, Mexico. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2021, 208, 111493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Berumen-Rodríguez, A.A.; Díaz de León-Martínez, L.; Zamora-Mendoza, B.N.; Orta-Arellanos, H.; Saldaña-Villanueva, K.; Barrera-López, V.; Gómez-Gómez, A.; Pérez-Vázquez, F.J.; Díaz-Barriga, F.; Flores-Ramírez, R. Evaluation of Respiratory Function and Biomarkers of Exposure to Mixtures of Pollutants in Brick-Kilns Workers from a Marginalized Urban Area in Mexico. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 67833–67842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Perez-Vazquez, F.J.; Flores-Ramirez, R.; Ochoa-Martinez, A.C.; Orta-Garcia, S.T.; Hernandez-Castro, B.; Carrizalez-Yañez, L.; Pérez-Maldonado, I.N. Concentrations of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and Heavy Metals in Soil from San Luis Potosí, México. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2015, 187, 4119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Gamiño-Gutiérrez, S.P.; González-Pérez, C.I.; Gonsebatt, M.E.; Monroy-Fernández, M.G. Arsenic and Lead Contamination in Urban Soils of Villa de La Paz (Mexico) Affected by Historical Mine Wastes and Its Effect on Children’s Health Studied by Micronucleated Exfoliated Cells Assay. Environ. Geochem. Health 2013, 35, 37–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Franco-Hernández, M.O.; Vásquez-Murrieta, M.S.; Patiño-Siciliano, A.; Dendooven, L. Heavy Metals Concentration in Plants Growing on Mine Tailings in Central Mexico. Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 3864–3869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. González-Grijalva, B.; Meza-Figueroa, D.; Romero, F.M.; Robles-Morúa, A.; Meza-Montenegro, M.; García-Rico, L.; Ochoa-Contreras, R. The Role of Soil Mineralogy on Oral Bioaccessibility of Lead: Implications for Land Use and Risk Assessment. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 657, 1468–1479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Pelletier, N.; Chételat, J.; Cousens, B.; Zhang, S.; Stepner, D.; Muir, D.C.G.; Vermaire, J.C. Lead Contamination from Gold Mining in Yellowknife Bay (Northwest Territories), Reconstructed Using Stable Lead Isotopes. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 259, 113888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Muller, S.; Lassin, A.; Lai, F.; Thiéry, D.; Guignot, S. Modelling Releases from Tailings in Life Cycle Assessments of the Mining Sector: From Generic Models to Reactive Transport Modelling. Miner. Eng. 2022, 180, 107481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Zhang, Y.; Song, B.; Zhou, Z. Pollution Assessment and Source Apportionment of Heavy Metals in Soil from Lead—Zinc Mining Areas of South China. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 109320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Liu, W.; Zafar, A.; Khan, Z.I.; Nadeem, M.; Ahmad, K.; Wajid, K.; Bashir, H.; Munir, M.; Malik, I.S.; Ashfaq, A. Bioaccumulation of Lead in Different Varieties of Wheat Plant Irrigated with Wastewater in Remote Agricultural Regions. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 27937–27951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Environmental and Human Health 1999. Available online: https://ccme.ca/en/res/copper-canadian-soil-quality-guidelines-for-the-protection-of-environmental-and-human-health-en.pdf (accessed on 14 July 2023).
  81. Muñoz, S.; Valdez, E.; Castillo, J.; Badillo, F.; Vega-Carrillo, H.; Salas Luévano, M. Accumulation of As and Pb in Vegetables Grown in Agricultural Soils Contaminated by Historical Mining in Zacatecas, Mexico; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  82. Abelsohn, A.R.; Sanborn, M. Lead and Children: Clinical Management for Family Physicians. Can. Fam. Physician 2010, 56, 531–535. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  83. Muciño-Sandoval, K.; Ariza, A.C.; Ortiz-Panozo, E.; Pizano-Zárate, M.L.; Mercado-García, A.; Wright, R.; Maria Téllez-Rojo, M.; Sanders, A.P.; Tamayo-Ortiz, M. Prenatal and Early Childhood Exposure to Lead and Repeated Measures of Metabolic Syndrome Risk Indicators from Childhood to Preadolescence. Front. Pediatr. 2021, 9, 750316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Ommati, M.M.; Ahmadi, H.N.; Sabouri, S.; Retana-Marquez, S.; Abdoli, N.; Rashno, S.; Niknahad, H.; Jamshidzadeh, A.; Mousavi, K.; Rezaei, M.; et al. Glycine Protects the Male Reproductive System against Lead Toxicity via Alleviating Oxidative Stress, Preventing Sperm Mitochondrial Impairment, Improving Kinematics of Sperm, and Blunting the Downregulation of Enzymes Involved in the Steroidogenesis. Environ. Toxicol. 2022, 37, 2990–3006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Ebrahimi, M.; Khalili, N.; Razi, S.; Keshavarz-Fathi, M.; Khalili, N.; Rezaei, N. Effects of Lead and Cadmium on the Immune System and Cancer Progression. J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng. 2020, 18, 335–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Environments 11 00043 g001
Figure 1. Lead (Pb) mining and Pb battery recycling industries in Mexico. The inner box indicates the mining Pb production from 2010 to 2022. Pb production is depicted as color intensity on the map. The green circles indicate the Pb battery recycling plants located in each state. Image created by ArcMap 10.3.1 software using data from National Institute of Statistic and Geography INEGI [19] and Commission for Environmental Cooperation CEC [20].
Figure 1. Lead (Pb) mining and Pb battery recycling industries in Mexico. The inner box indicates the mining Pb production from 2010 to 2022. Pb production is depicted as color intensity on the map. The green circles indicate the Pb battery recycling plants located in each state. Image created by ArcMap 10.3.1 software using data from National Institute of Statistic and Geography INEGI [19] and Commission for Environmental Cooperation CEC [20].
Environments 11 00043 g001
Environments 11 00043 g002
Figure 2. Flow chart of report selection.
Figure 2. Flow chart of report selection.
Environments 11 00043 g002
Environments 11 00043 g003
Figure 3. Mexican states’ mining Pb production, Pb battery facilities, and Pb pollution reports. Aguascalientes (AGU), Baja California Norte (BCN), Baja California Sur (BCS), Chihuahua (CHH), Coahuila (COA), Durango (DUR), Estado de México (MEX), Guanajuato (GUA), Guerrero (GRO), Hidalgo (HID), Jalisco (JAL), Michoacán (MIC), Morelos (MOR), Nuevo León (NLE), Oaxaca (OAX), Puebla (PUE), Querétaro (QUE), San Luis Potosí (SLP), Sinaloa (SIN), Sonora (SON), Tamaulipas (TAM), Tlaxcala (TLA), and Zacatecas (ZAC) are depicted. The mean of Pb mining production (tons) during 2010–2022 (bluish gray) and the Pb battery recycling facilities in each state are represented (battery symbol). The number of land-use symbols indicates the quantity of reports retrieved per State.
Figure 3. Mexican states’ mining Pb production, Pb battery facilities, and Pb pollution reports. Aguascalientes (AGU), Baja California Norte (BCN), Baja California Sur (BCS), Chihuahua (CHH), Coahuila (COA), Durango (DUR), Estado de México (MEX), Guanajuato (GUA), Guerrero (GRO), Hidalgo (HID), Jalisco (JAL), Michoacán (MIC), Morelos (MOR), Nuevo León (NLE), Oaxaca (OAX), Puebla (PUE), Querétaro (QUE), San Luis Potosí (SLP), Sinaloa (SIN), Sonora (SON), Tamaulipas (TAM), Tlaxcala (TLA), and Zacatecas (ZAC) are depicted. The mean of Pb mining production (tons) during 2010–2022 (bluish gray) and the Pb battery recycling facilities in each state are represented (battery symbol). The number of land-use symbols indicates the quantity of reports retrieved per State.
Environments 11 00043 g003
Environments 11 00043 g004
Figure 4. Contamination grade in Mexican locations. (a) Geoaccumulation index (Igeo) and (b) ecological risk index (ERI) are represented in the scheme. Circles in red, orange, and green indicate mining, agricultural, and residential land, respectively, in Mexican locations. AGU, Aguascalientes; BCN, Baja California Norte; BCS, Baja California Sur; CHH, Chihuahua; COA, Coahuila; DUR, Durango; GRO, Guerrero; GUA, Guanajuato; HID, Hidalgo; MOR, Morelos; NLE, Nuevo León; PUE, Puebla; QUE, Querétaro; SLP, San Luis Potosí; SON, Sonora; TLA, Tlaxcala; and ZAC, Zacatecas.
Figure 4. Contamination grade in Mexican locations. (a) Geoaccumulation index (Igeo) and (b) ecological risk index (ERI) are represented in the scheme. Circles in red, orange, and green indicate mining, agricultural, and residential land, respectively, in Mexican locations. AGU, Aguascalientes; BCN, Baja California Norte; BCS, Baja California Sur; CHH, Chihuahua; COA, Coahuila; DUR, Durango; GRO, Guerrero; GUA, Guanajuato; HID, Hidalgo; MOR, Morelos; NLE, Nuevo León; PUE, Puebla; QUE, Querétaro; SLP, San Luis Potosí; SON, Sonora; TLA, Tlaxcala; and ZAC, Zacatecas.
Environments 11 00043 g004
Table 1. Contamination grade based on the geoaccumulation index (Igeo) [27].
Table 1. Contamination grade based on the geoaccumulation index (Igeo) [27].
GradeIgeo ValueSoil Quality
0≤0Uncontaminated
10 < Igeo < 1Uncontaminated to moderately contaminated
21 < Igeo < 2Moderately contaminated
32 < Igeo < 3Moderately to heavily contaminated
43 < Igeo < 4Heavily contaminated
54 < Igeo < 5Heavily to extremely contaminated
6>5Extremely contaminated
Table 2. Parameters to obtain the average daily intake (ADI). Modified from Kan et al. (2021) [32].
Table 2. Parameters to obtain the average daily intake (ADI). Modified from Kan et al. (2021) [32].
ParameterDescriptionSubstituted Value
CsPb concentration identified in soil* mg Pb/kg determined in each report
IRIngestion rate of soil100 mg/day for adults
200 g/day for children
EDExposure duration24 years for adults
6 years for children
EFExposure frequency350 days/year
FIFactor ingestion1
BWBody weight63 kg for adults
29 kg for children
ATAverage exposure timeED × 365 days for non-carcinogen
76.6 × 365 days for carcinogens
SASkin surface area exposed5700 cm2 for adults
2800 cm2 for children
AFAdherence factor0.07 mg/cm2 h for adults
0.2 mg/cm2 h for children
ABSDermal absorption factor0.001
ETExposure time8 h/day
PEFEmission factor1.36 × 109 m3/kg
* Substituted value was the Pb concentration in soil reported.
Table 3. Pb concentrations in mining and/or tailings land.
Table 3. Pb concentrations in mining and/or tailings land.
LocationCharacteristics and Distance from the Pollution SourceRange; Median, or Mean ± SD (mg/kg)References
AGU, AsientosDry season, 10 m *164.6[43]
Rainy season, 10 m *2309.5[43]
BCS, Los Planes“San Antonio” mine7.1 ± 1.9[37]
“Ensenada de Muertos” mine3.9 ± 0.2[37]
HID, Zimapán20 m **610.0 ± 5.0[44]
30 m **505.5 ± 61.5[44]
Tailing2211.6 ± 232.5[45]
5–45 m *268.0–996.0; med 693.6[46]
GRO, Taxco5–45 m *89.0–2859.0; med 832.4[46]
GUA, Pozos5–35 m * 58.0–469.0; med 243.0 [46]
GUA, Xichú5–35 m * 111–12,966; med 1171.3 [46]
QUE, Maconí5–45 m * 70–234; med 126.6 [46]
QUE, Peñamiller “La Estrella” mine 1.0–2.8; med 1.4 [47]
SLP, Cedral Currently active mining 2682.4–18,537.3; 4327.0 ± 3015.6[48]
SLP, Cerro de San Pedro Current and historical tailings 281.7–19,549.3; 4220.0 ± 3793.3[48]
SLP, Charcas Historical mining 442 years ago 42.1–17,861.2; 12,929.6 ± 4689.0[48]
Mine<400.0[49]
SLP, Villa de la Paz Current and historical tailings 189.2–5088.3; 907.8 ± 996.7[48]
Tailing 555.0 [50]
Hill 5488.0 [50]
Rosettophyllous desert in soil 117.9–487.1 [51]
Microphyllous desert in soil 428.1–2226.8 [51]
SON, Nacozari de GarcíaAbandoned tailings II21.4–122.4, 70.0 ± 28.3[52]
Abandoned tailing III2.5–33.9; 14.1 ± 9.5[52]
SON, San Felipe de JesúsSulfide-rich tailings9720.0–23,400.0; med 21,288.0[41]
Oxide-rich tailings8960.0–23,400.0; med 14,763.0[41]
ZAC, Vetagrande“Jal Viejo” tailing3984.0 ± 306[53]
Mining soil with Reseda Luteola L.853 ± 250[53]
Mining soil with Asphodelus fistulosus L.2656 ± 151[53]
*, distance from mine; **, distance from tailing; med, median; SD, standard deviation. AGU, Aguascalientes; BCS, Baja California Sur; GUA, Guanajuato; GRO, Guerrero; HID, Hidalgo; QUE, Querétaro; SLP, San Luis Potosí; SON, Sonora; ZAC, Zacatecas.
Table 4. Pb concentrations in agricultural land.
Table 4. Pb concentrations in agricultural land.
LocationCharacteristics and Distance from the Pollution SourceRange; Median or Mean ± SD (mg/kg)References
AGU, Asientos
BCN, Cerro Prieto		1600 m *369.7–374.7; med 372.2[43]
Geothermal station14.7–25.8; med 19.9[54]
CHH, AldamaWalnut orchards near mine1–47.4; med 30.5[55]
CHH, Juarez ValleyJuarez Valley (agrochemicals)23.4 ± 6.4[56]
DUR, Santiago PapasquiaroForest soil impacted by mine tailing26.5–768.6; 256.8 ± 166.8[57]
GRO, Santa Rosa3000 m **229.6 ± 50.6[58]
400 m **59.9 ± 0.1[58]
40 m **3269.7 ± 53.7[58]
HID, Zimapán20 m **505.5 ± 61.5[59]
30 m **674.0 ± 3.5[59]
100 m ** Soil from terrestrial plants365.0–3884.0; 1722.8 ± 1277.7[60]
Soil from wetlands and aquatic plants201.0–3991.0; 2019.2 ± 1138.6[60]
SON, San Felipe de JesúsSoil adjacent mine tailings106.0–4630.0; med 1673.3[41]
SON, Yaqui and Mayo valleysYaqui valley (PbHAsO4 pesticide)10.0–195.0; med 40.1[61]
Mayo valley (PbHAsO4 pesticide)9.0–33.0; med 23.2[61]
ZAC, Vetagrande Agricultural and rangeland soils near mines 7516.6 ± 456.3[42]
*, distance from mine; **, distance from tailing; med, median; SD, standard deviation. AGU, Aguascalientes; BCN, Baja California Norte; CHH, Chihuahua; DUR, Durango; GRO, Guerrero; HID, Hidalgo; SON, Sonora; ZAC, Zacatecas.
Table 5. Pb concentrations in residential land.
Table 5. Pb concentrations in residential land.
LocationCharacteristics and Distance from the Pollution SourceRange; Median or Mean ± SD (mg/kg)References
AGU, Asientos800 m *, residential zone33.2–44.9; med 39.0[43]
1600 m *, residential zone82.3–98.8; med 90.5[43]
BCS, Los Planes“El Sargento” town, 10 km *5.2 ± 0.5[37]
“Brisamar” town, 40 km *0.4 ± 0.4[37]
CHH, Chihuahua600 m from “Ávalos” Pb smelter 62–4716; med 1499[62]
COA, Torreón<1.5 km from Pb smelter25–21,179[63]
>1.5 km from Pb smelter24.0–589.0[63]
Pb smelter plant130–12,050; med 374.0[64]
DUR, Durango“Cerro de Mercado” mining district21.6–107.3[65]
MOR, TlayacapanPottery workshops165.0–916.0; med 195.0[66]
NLE, MonterreyBattery factory8.0–6064.0; med 83.4[67]
Industrial zones224.0–1230.0; 455.0 ± 204.0[68]
PUE, Popocatépetl Volcanic soil3.6–60.3[69]
SLP, CedralOld mines and tailings98–4225; med 263[62]
SLP, Cerro de San PedroUrban zone mining activity11,124.5–18,537.8; med 6485.1[70]
SLP, Las TercerasBrick-kiln area19.9–611.5; med 60.5[71]
SLP, MoralesFormerly Pb-concentrate production62–5187; med 570[62]
SLP, San Luis PotosíIndustrial, and vehicular traffic zones25.0–435.0; 108.0 ± 105.0[72]
SLP, Villa de la PazUrban areas near mining activity37.0–16,991.0; 458.0 ± 4567.0[73]
Urban zone mining activity466.1–3486.4; med 1053.7[70]
Zone near tailing13–754; 373.4 ± 278.6[74]
SON, HermosilloTraffic paint and urban topsoils34.0–173.0; med 59.9[75]
TLA, Trinidad TenexyecacPottery area411–2740; med 1126[62]
*, distance from mine; med, median; SD, standard deviation. AGU, Aguascalientes; BCS, Baja California Sur; CHH, Chihuahua; COA, Coahuila; DUR, Durango; MOR, Morelos; NLE, Nuevo León; PUE, Puebla; SLP; San Luis Potosí; SON, Sonora; and TLA, Tlaxcala.
Table 6. Hazard and cancer risk indexes in mining, agricultural, and residential soils.
Table 6. Hazard and cancer risk indexes in mining, agricultural, and residential soils.
LocationMiningAgriculturalResidential
HICRI (10−6)HICRI (10−6)HICRI (10−6)
AdultChildrenAdultChildrenAdultChildrenAdultChildrenAdultChildrenAdultChildren
AGU, Asientos5.523.950.154.51.77.215.116.40.31.22.62.9
BCN, Cerro Prieto------------0.10.40.80.9------------
BCS, Los Planes0.00.10.20.2------------0.00.10.10.1
CHH, Aldama------------0.10.61.21.3------------
CHH, Chihuahua------------------------6.728.960.866.0
CHH, Juarez Valley------------0.10.51.01.0------------
COA, Torreón------------------------33.0142.1299.2325.0
DUR, Durango------------------------0.52.14.44.7
DUR, Santiago Papasquiaro------------1.14.910.411.3------------
GRO, Santa Rosa------------5.322.848.152.2------------
GRO, Taxco3.716.033.736.6------------------------
GUA, Pozos1.14.79.910.7------------------------
GUA, Xichú5.222.547.551.6------------------------
HID, Zimapán4.519.140.243.75.523.749.954.2------------
MOR, Tlayacapan------------------------0.93.87.98.6
NLE, Monterrey------------------------1.25.210.911.9
PUE, Popocatépetl volcano------------------------0.31.22.42.7
QUE, Maconí0.62.45.15.6------------------------
QUE, Peñamiller 0.00.00.10.1------------------------
SLP, Cedral19.383.3175.4190.5------------1.25.110.711.6
SLP, Cerro de San Pedro18.881.2171.1185.8------------29.0124.8262.9285.5
SLP, Charcas 29.8128.3270.2293.5------------------------
SLP, Las Terceras------------------------0.31.22.52.7
SLP, Morales------------------------2.511.023.125.1
SLP, San Luis Potosí------------------------0.52.14.44.8
SLP, Villa de la Paz8.637.278.485.16.126.255.059.82.812.125.527.7
SON, Hermosillo------------------------0.31.22.42.6
SON, Nacozari de García0.20.81.71.9------------------------
SON, San Felipe de Jesús80.5346.9730.7793.77.532.267.873.7------------
SON, Yaqui and Mayo valleys------------0.20.61.31.4------------
TLA, Trinidad Tenexyecac------------------------5.021.745.649.6
ZAC, Vetagrande 11.248.1101.2110.016.470.7149.0161.8------------
---, no report found; CRI, cancer risk index; HI, hazard index; AGU, Aguascalientes; BCN, Baja California Norte; BCS, Baja California Sur; CHH, Chihuahua; COA, Coahuila; DUR, Durango; GRO, Guerrero; GUA, Guanajuato; HID, Hidalgo; MOR, Morelos; NLE, Nuevo León; PUE, Puebla; QUE, Querétaro; SLP, San Luis Potosí; SON, Sonora; TLA, Tlaxcala; and ZAC, Zacatecas.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Briseño-Bugarín, J.; Araujo-Padilla, X.; Escot-Espinoza, V.M.; Cardoso-Ortiz, J.; Flores de la Torre, J.A.; López-Luna, A. Lead (Pb) Pollution in Soil: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Contamination Grade and Health Risk in Mexico. Environments 2024, 11, 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments11030043

AMA Style

Briseño-Bugarín J, Araujo-Padilla X, Escot-Espinoza VM, Cardoso-Ortiz J, Flores de la Torre JA, López-Luna A. Lead (Pb) Pollution in Soil: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Contamination Grade and Health Risk in Mexico. Environments. 2024; 11(3):43. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments11030043

Chicago/Turabian Style

Briseño-Bugarín, Jorge, Xelha Araujo-Padilla, Victor Manuel Escot-Espinoza, Jaime Cardoso-Ortiz, Juan Armando Flores de la Torre, and Argelia López-Luna. 2024. "Lead (Pb) Pollution in Soil: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Contamination Grade and Health Risk in Mexico" Environments 11, no. 3: 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments11030043

APA Style

Briseño-Bugarín, J., Araujo-Padilla, X., Escot-Espinoza, V. M., Cardoso-Ortiz, J., Flores de la Torre, J. A., & López-Luna, A. (2024). Lead (Pb) Pollution in Soil: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Contamination Grade and Health Risk in Mexico. Environments, 11(3), 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments11030043

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop