|
Fig. 1.
Locations of the study area, water sampling sites and hydrogeochemical zonation in the study area.
Fig. 2.
Piper plot of water samples in the study area.
Fig. 3.
Box-Whisker plots of TDS (a), ORP (b), NH4
+(c), Fe(II) (d), HCO3
−(e), SO
4 2
−/Cl−(f), As (g), B (h), and
δ
11
B values (i) in groundwater in the different zones.
Fig. 4.
Plot of
δ
2
H versus
δ
18
O in water samples in the study area (LMWL: the local meteoric water line (
Yang et al., 2009
); GMWL: the global meteoric water line (
Craig, 1961
); the legend is same as shown in
Fig. 2
).
Fig. 5.
Plot of Ca/Na versus Mg/Na (The carbonate, silicate, and evaporite end numbers were reported by
Gaillardet et al. (1999)
) (a), and mineral equilibriumdiagrams of Na+-H+-SiO
2
(b) and Ca
2
+-H+-SiO
2
(c) system at 25◦C (phase boundaries are plotted using thermodynamic data of
Liu et al. (2020b)
and
Wang et al.(2009)
), Gibbs plot (d), relationships between (Na++
K+-Cl−) and B (e), and between 1/B and
δ
11
B (f) (the legend is same as shown in
Fig. 2
).
Fig. 6.
Relationships between B and HCO3
−(a), Na+/Ca+(b), Fe(II) (c), and NH4
+(d) in groundwater (the legend is same as shown in
Fig. 2
).
Fig. 7.
Box-Whisker plot of groundwater B/Cl, Sr/Ca, SI
calcite
, SI
dolomite
, and SI
siderite
in groundwater from the different zones.
Fig. 8.
Schematic plot showing that
δ
11
B values were controlled by a combination of B removal by co-precipitation and B release from Fe(III) oxide dissolution and desorption. The averages for each zone are shown for reference. We assume that B release (step 1; blue line) was followed by B removal (step 2; green line). The open circles represent the 1/B versus
δ
11
B before co-precipitation.
Fig. 9.
Relationships between As and
δ
11
B value (a), HCO3
−(b), Na+/Ca+(c), Fe(II) (d), NH4
+(e), SI
calcite
+
dolomite(f) in groundwater (the legend is same as shownin
Fig. 2
).
|
关注我们
