[Spatial Distribution Patterns of Soil Organic Carbon in Karst Forests of the Lijiang River Basin and Its Driving Factors].

The aim of this study was to explore the carbon storage potential of karst forest soils in the Lijiang River Basin, reveal the spatial pattern of soil organic carbon (SOC), investigate the contributions and pathways of each driving factor to the spatial distribution of soil organic carbon, and provide a scientific basis for assessing the carbon cycle function of karst forests in the region. We employed structural equation modeling (SEM) and correlation analysis to investigate the spatial distribution characteristics of forest soil organic carbon in different basin sections (upper, middle, and lower reaches) and soil layers at different depths of the Lijiang River. Additionally, the direct and indirect ratios of each factor were quantified. The results showed that the overall soil layer of karst forest soils in the Lijiang River Basin was shallow, and soil organic carbon was phenoconcentric. The distribution of soil organic carbon content in different watershed sections was upstream > downstream > midstream, and the distribution of readily oxidizable carbon (ROC) and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) was consistent, whereas the distribution of microbial biomass carbon (MBC) was upstream > midstream > downstream. The contribution of various biotic and abiotic factors to the spatial distribution of soil organic carbon in karst forests in the watershed was different, and their contributions were ranked in descending order as:soil physicochemical factors > soil organic carbon active fraction > sample elevation > sample species diversity, with the total effects of 1.148, 0.574, 0.284, and -0.013, respectively. Among them, the sample site elevation had only an indirect effect on soil organic carbon, and the soil organic carbon active fraction had only a direct effect on soil organic carbon. Among the driving factors, total soil nitrogen, soil oxidizable organic carbon, sample site species richness, and soil soluble organic carbon could be used as important predictors of soil organic carbon content in karst forests in the Lijiang River Basin. Therefore, it is necessary to establish an effective eco-environmental protection mechanism covering the whole Lijiang River Basin, to reduce and control the impact of anthropogenic disturbances (especially in the middle urban section of the Lijiang River Basin), and to enhance and protect the species diversity of karst forests in the basin in order to improve soil physicochemical properties, improve and enhance the content of the soil organic carbon active fraction, and enhance the soil organic carbon stocks of karst forests in the Lijiang River Basin through other effective ways, as well as to promote the enhancement of the regional forest carbon sink function.

Stocks, flows and emissions of DBDPE in China and its international distribution through products and waste.

Decabromodiphenyl ethane (DBDPE) is an alternative to the commercial decabromodiphenyl ether (deca-BDE) mixture but has potentially similar persistence, bioaccumulation potential and toxicity. While it is widely used as a flame retardant in electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) in China, DBDPE could be distributed globally on a large scale with the international trade of EEE emanating from China. Here, we performed a dynamic substance flow analysis to estimate the time-dependent mass flows, stocks and emissions of DBDPE in China, and the global spread of DBDPE originating in China through the international trade of EEE and e-waste. Our analysis indicates that, between 2006 and 2016, ∼230 thousand tonnes (kt) of DBDPE were produced in China; production, use and disposal activities led to the release of 196 tonnes of DBDPE to the environment. By the end of 2016, ∼152 kt of the DBDPE produced resided in in-use products across China. During the period 2000-2016, ∼39 kt of DBDPE were exported from China in EEE products, most of which (>50%) ended up in North America. Based on projected trends of China's DBDPE production, use and EEE exports, we predict that, by 2026, ∼74 and ∼14 kt of DBDPE originating in China will reside in in-use and waste stocks, respectively, in regions other than mainland China, which will act as long-term emission sources of DBDPE worldwide. This study discusses the considerable impact of DBDPE originating in China and distributed globally through the international trade of EEE; this is projected to occur on a large scale in the near future, which necessitates countermeasures.

Disease burden attributable to endocrine-disrupting chemicals exposure in China: A case study of phthalates.

While it has been acknowledged that exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) is associated with human diseases, the overall disease burden attributable to the exposure to a specific EDC has rarely been evaluated. Based on existing models for assessing probabilities of causation and a comprehensive review of available data, we analyzed the burden of three diseases, i.e., male infertility, adult obesity, and diabetes, among the general Chinese population resulting from exposure to phthalates. Our estimation indicates that exposure to phthalates is associated with ~2.50 million cases of the three diseases across China in 2010, causing ~57.2 billion Chinese Yuan (equivalent to ~9 billion US dollars) of health care costs in a year. Male infertility has the largest number of cases, followed by adult obesity and diabetes. Based on these phthalate-specific estimates, we further estimated that the total disease cost due to exposure to the overall EDCs amounted to ~429.43 billion Chinese Yuan in China in 2010, accounting for 1.07% of nationwide gross domestic product (GDP). When comparing our results with an earlier estimate for the European Union (EU) member countries, we find that exposure to phthalates leads to quite a similar disease burden per unit of GDP in both regions. Our study illustrates the considerable socio-economic impact of EDC exposure on human society, implying the imperative need for global risk reduction actions on EDCs, especially in view of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.