EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
Home All issues Volume 59 / No 3 (July - September) Radioprotection, 59 3 (2024) 235-245 Full HTML
Open Access
Issue
Radioprotection
Volume 59, Number 3, July - September
Page(s) 235 - 245
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/radiopro/2024018
Published online 18 September 2024

© A.E.A. Elzain et al., Published by EDP Sciences, 2024

Licence Creative CommonsThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1 Introduction

Radon-222, a naturally occurring radioactive gas with the longest half-life (3.82 days), This isotope comes from the decaying chain of uranium-238. Water’s radionuclide content is crucial as it can dissolve these elements during interactions with soil and rocks (Duong et al., 2024). Environmental monitoring focuses on detecting natural radiation from radon and its offspring in air, soil, building materials and water (Idriss et al., 2020; Elzain et al., 2023). Radon-222, a chemical found in drinking water, can cause cancer by damaging the DNA of lungs and stomach cells and can also lead to stomach disorders and classified as the second leading cause of lung cancer (Riudavets et al., 2022). Lung and stomach cancer are responsible for many annual cancer deaths and health problems in the USA and Europe (Darby et al., 2006; Messier and Serre, 2016). Health organizations have established acceptable levels of radon and radium concentrations, with the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) defining a radon concentration value of 11 Bq.l−1 to ensure safe drinking water through regulating drinking water quality with the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL), the legal upper limit on material allowed in public water systems (USEPA, 2022). The concentration of radon in groundwater can vary over time due to factors like recharge dilution and pumping changes (WHO, 2011; ISO, 2023). The European Commission has recommended measures to address radon in drinking water, although the de-ionization of water can reduce radon concentrations in tube wells (EUC, 2001; Nakano et al., 2020). The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) estimates the transfer coefficient of radon from water to indoor air to be 10−4, and suggests radon concentration in water for human consumption from 4 to 40 Bq.l−1 (UNSCEAR, 2008). The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for drinking water quality do not provide recommended radon levels, but it is more appropriate to measure concentrations in indoor air; thus, public water supplies should control radon levels if they exceed the WHO guideline value of 100 Bq.l−1(WHO, 2004). The EU Directive 2013/51/EURATOM sets limits on the concentration of radon in water for human consumption (EUC, 2013). This study aims to evaluate and supplement previous research on radon health effects in Gezira State, Sudan, and other investigations in Africa, focusing on concentration levels, effective dose rates, and age groups (Traoré I. et al., 2013; Elzain, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2023; Isinkaye and Ajiboye, 2017; Elzain et al., 2019). The results can help identify potential health hazards associated with water use in the region.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 The study area

Gezira State is a densely populated region located in the east-central part of Sudan. Its coordinates are 14.5° N and 33.5° E (Fig. 1). The state’s capital is Wad Madani, and it shares borders with Khartoum, Sinnar, White Nile, and Gedarif States. The northern and northeastern parts of Gezira State have a semi-arid climate, while the eastern and southern parts have a dry monsoon climate with a maximum mean temperature of 47°C. The area is primarily flat, with clay soil and small hills, and can be divided into three major units: highlands and isolated smaller mountains, clayey and sandy soil areas, and valleys (Wadis). These details were reported by UNDP in 2010, MOG in 1994, and studies by Sami et al. (2014) and Abdelgalili et al. (2019) (MOG, 1994; UNDP, 2010; Sami et al., 2014; Abdelgalili et al., 2019).

2.2 Evaluations of radon gas from water samples using the RAD7 H2O technique

The RAD7 radon-in-air monitor was employed to measure the levels of radon in water samples and assess their quality by using the RAD H2O technique. The test followed the Wat-250 protocols and began with the RAD7’s internal air pump expelling radon-222 and measuring its activity concentration. The closed-loop aeration system and radon-in-air monitor completed the process within 30 min. The RAD7 was attached to 250-ml sample bottles, and a closed air loop was circulated through the water sample until the RAD-H2O system achieved equilibrium. The RAD7 employed a passivated implanted planar silicon detector (PIPS) to detect alpha-decaying radon progeny 218Po and 214Po. After 30 min, the RAD7 created a summary report with the average radon reading (Durridge, 2023). Water samples’ concentration levels can be determined using the following formula (Elzain, 2017):

(1)

The (CRnW) level from water is determined by measuring the radon concentration (CRn) using a RAD7 device. The time interval between sampling and testing is denoted by (t), while (λ) represents the decay constant, which is equivalent to 0.181 day−1, given that the half-life is 3.83 days.

2.3 Calculation of the annual effective dose

Home radiation exposure is primarily due to radon concentrations and the effective dose rates of water released during daily tasks like dishwashing and showering (Nazaroff and Nero, 1988; Niculita-Hirzel et al., 2021). The following formula can estimate the annual effective dose of radon released from water into the interior air due to regular household activities (UNSCEAR, 2000):

(2)

CRnW is the radon concentration in water, Qf is the indoor occupation factor with the value of 0.8, Ef is the equilibrium factor that equal to 0.4, R: is the ratio of radon in air to water = 10−4, D is the conversion factor of 9 nSv. (h.Bq.m−3) −1 and 8760 is the number of hours annually.

Radon in water enters the body through ingestion and inhalation, exposing the stomach and lungs. Annual effective doses can be calculated using UNSCEAR parameters(UNSCEAR, 2000). The amount of water consumed impacts the annual mean exposure doses through ingestion. Additionally, radon-222 can leak into indoor air during household chores. The annual mean exposure doses of radon-222 in water for ingestion (EwIng) and inhalation (EwInh) were calculated using UNSCEAR 2000 parameters (UNSCEAR, 2000):

(3)

where CW is the annual intake of water of (150, 350, and 500) (l.y−1) for infants, children, and adults, CRnW is the concentration of radon-222 in water, and DF-Ing is the ingested dose conversion factor that equals (7 × 10−8, 2 × 10−8, and 1 × 10−8) (Sv.Bq−1) ICRP, 1996.

Using the UNSCEAR parameters, the annual effective doses for inhalation of radon in water were calculated:

(4)

where O is the average indoor occupancy time per individual (7000 h.y−1). The ingestion dose calculated by multiplying inhalation and ingestion dose tissue weighting factors, with a tissue weighting factor of 0.12 ICRP, 1996; UNSCEAR, 2000.

The total annual mean exposure doses for people may be determined by adding the annual effective doses for ingestion and inhalation.

3 Results and discussion

This study examines radon concentration levels, annual effective dose rates, ingestion and inhalation dose rates, and effective dose rates for adults, children, and infants in water samples from 26 locations in Gezira State, Sudan, as shown in Tables 1 and 2 and Figures 1–9.

Table 1 and Figure 3 show how the levels of radon concentration vary from 1.55 ± 0.13Bq.l−1 to 18.38 ± 3.05Bq.l−1 with an average of 7.68 ± 1.07Bq.l−1. The study examined water radon concentrations in various locations, revealing variations may be due to geological conditions, proximity to uranium-rich rocks, underground water, local water sources, and human activities and industrial processes. However, all measured radon concentrations were well below the recommended limits, maintaining safe domestic water standards. 23.1% of samples exceeded the USEPA’s maximum contamination level, while 76.9% were below the maximum contaminant level (USEPA, 2022). 100% of radon concentrations were below the UNSCEAR, WHO, and EU’s recommended reference level of 100Bq.l−1 (EUC, 2001; UNSCEAR, 2008; WHO, 2011). Table 2 presents a comparison of radon concentrations from various locations globally, including Ghana, the Qassim area of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and China. Higher concentrations were reported in China and the Iwaraja-Ifewara faults in Southwestern Nigeria, whereas lower values were observed in Ghana, Qassim area of Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan.

Table 1 and Figure 4 present the annual effective doses released into the air from water samples in the study area. The calculated effective dose rates reserved by radon released from water to indoor air ranged from 3.87 ± 0.32 μSv.y−1 to 45.89 ± 7.62 μSv.y−1 with a mean value of 19.17 ± 2.68 μSv.y−1. The study has found that the amount of radon exposure in water can vary significantly due to different levels of concentration and leakage from normal usage. This variation leads to a wide range of effective dose rates in indoor air, which means it’s crucial to consider these variations when assessing potential health risks in residential settings. It’s important for individuals to be aware of these risks and take appropriate measures to mitigate radon exposure. The World Health Organization (WHO) has established a tolerable annual mean exposure dose level for safe water use, and if the dose exceeds this limit, remedial action must be taken. The cumulative annual mean exposure doses for all samples are within the permissible level range suggested by the WHO and EU Council (EUC, 2001; WHO, 2011).

Table 1 and Figures 5 and 7 display annual effective dose rates for ingestion, inhalation and total effective dose from water samples, with values ranging from 3.80 ± 0.32 to 45.03 ± 7.47 μSv.y−1; 3.91 ± 0.33 to 46.32 ± 7.69 μSv.y−1; and 7.70 ± 0.65 to 91.35 ± 15.16 μSv.y−1, with mean values of 18.81 ± 2.63 μSv.y−1 for ingestion, 19.34 ± 2.71 μSv.y−1 for inhalation, and 38.15 ± 5.34 μSv.y−1 for total annual effective dose rate, respectively. The study aimed to investigate the amount of radon exposure in household water samples and its effects on human health. When radon-contaminated water is consumed, it diffuses and irradiates the stomach wall, exposing it to radiation. The study found that both lung epithelial cells and stomach lining cells are affected, as the mean annual dose gained through inhalation is almost the same as that obtained through consumption, indicating that both lung epithelial cells and stomach lining cells are prone to risk (Sukanya et al., 2021). The average ingestion dose per individual and the inhalation dose were both lower than the required limit of 103 μSv.y−1, as established by UNSCEAR in 2000 (UNSCEAR, 2000). Additionally, the combined mean effective dose was less than the recommended maximum value set by the WHO for 2011 (WHO, 2011). The study also revealed that the radon concentrations in the water sources and locations within the study area were within the stochastic range. This indicates that there are minimal health risks and a low probability of developing cancer due to the exposure to radon. The study compares the effective dose rates resulting from ingestion, inhalation, and total effective dose rates from water samples with previous studies worldwide, as shown in Table 2. The study found that lower effective dose rates for ingestion were reported in Pakistan, Turkey, the Iwaraja-Ifewara faults in southwestern Nigeria, India, and the Qassim area of Saudi Arabia, higher values were reported only in Venezuela. Additionally, lower inhalation values were reported in India and Turkey, at the same time, the Iwaraja-Ifewara faults in southwestern Nigeria showed a higher value, whereas the value in Qassim area in Saudi Arabia showed a nearly congruent value compared to the study results. In comparison, the total effective dose rates from Pakistan, India, Turkey, and the Qassim area of Saudi Arabia showed lower values concerning our results, on the other hand, higher values were reported for the Iwaraja-Ifewara faults in southwestern Nigeria and Venezuela.

Table 1 and Figures 8 and 9 show the estimated values of the effective dose rates for the aimed age groups, namely, infants, children, and adults, have ranged from 16.28 ± 1.37 to 192.99 ± 32.03 μSv.y−1; 10.85 ± 0.91 to 128.66 ± 21.35 μSv.y−1 and 7.75 ± 0.65 to 91.90 ± 15.25 μSv.y−1, with mean values of 80.60 ± 11.27 μSv.y−1; 53.73 ± 7.51 μSv.y−1 and 38.38 ± 5.37 μSv.y−1 for these age groups, respectively. The study aims to investigate the health effects of exposure to radon in different age groups, particularly focusing on water consumption. It was found that infants are more vulnerable to radiation exposure due to their low organ mass and rapidly dividing cells (Alzen and Benz-Bohm, 2011). Adults are the second-most susceptible group due to their routine water intake. While the estimated dose of radiation does not pose a significant risk, the potential for radiation-induced damage varies depending on the dose and duration of exposure (Kesäniemi et al., 2019). Therefore, it is crucial to prioritize minimizing exposure to radon by monitoring and regulating its levels and implementing safety measures. These results are within the UNSCEAR (2000) and WHO (2011) recommended limits, but far below the ICRP, 1993 recommended action level for radon in homes. According to Table 2, the study findings reveal the compared annual effective dose rates for infants, children, and adults in various age groups globally. The lowest values were observed in Northeastern Saudi Arabia, India, and Pakistan, while the highest values were reported in Iraq and Oyun, Kwara State, Nigeria, for all age ranges. Further research is necessary to understand these risks, develop mitigation strategies, and reduce infants’ exposure to water sources and indoor air.

thumbnail Fig. 1

The study area in Gezira State of Sudan.
thumbnail Fig. 2

The RAD7-H2O configuration device’s schematic illustration for measuring radon in water.
thumbnail Fig. 3

Radon concentration from water samples (Bq.l−1).
thumbnail Fig. 4

Effective dose rate released from water to indoor air for various locations.
thumbnail Fig. 5

Effective dose rate for ingestion due to radon concentration from water samples.
thumbnail Fig. 6

Effective dose rate for inhalation due to radon concentration from water samples.
thumbnail Fig. 7

Total effective dose rate at various locations in Gezira state.
thumbnail Fig. 8

Effective dose rate for ingestion due to age groups.
thumbnail Fig. 9

Radon concentration from water vs effective dose rate for ingestion due to age groups.
Table 1

Average radon concentration, annual effective doses released to air, total annual effective doses for inhalation and ingestion and the annual effective doses rates for (infants, children and adults) from the water samples.

Table 2

A comparison of the study findings and global results.

4 Conclusion

The study aimed to analyze the concentration levels of radon and effective dose rates concerning age groups in Gezira State, Sudan, by collecting 26 water samples using the RAD7 technique. Results showed that the radon concentration levels were below the recommended limits, indicating that there was no immediate health risk for people who consume domestic water. However, 23.1% of the samples exceeded the maximum contamination level recommended by the USEPA, while 76.9% were below it. The total radon concentration was also found to be below the recommended reference levels of UNSCEAR, WHO, and the EU. All age groups had annual effective and cumulative exposure doses within permissible levels, with infants having a higher risk but minimal radiation dose. Nonetheless, further research is needed to better understand these risks and develop strategies to mitigate them.

Acknowlegments

The authors are thankful to the inhabitants of these locations for their help in this work.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific funding.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Data availability statement

The research data associated with this article are included within the article.

References

  • Abdelgalili EB, Ahmed M, Adam J, Hamid S, Afsatou T, Elshiekh I, Natasha P. 2019. Water source quality testing in Gezira State, Sudan, using the compartment bag test. Appl Water Sci 9(8): 193. [Google Scholar]
  • Ahmad N, Uddin Z, Rehman JU, Bakhsh M, Ullah H. 2020. Evaluation of radon concentration and heavy metals in drinking water and their health implications to the population of Quetta, Balochistan, Pakistan. Int J Environ Anal Chem 100 (1): 32–41. [Google Scholar]
  • Alzen G, Benz-Bohm G. 2011. Radiation Protection in Pediatric Radiology. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International. [Google Scholar]
  • Ameen AIM, Mansour HH. 2022. 222Rn activity concentration measurement and its radiological risks in the environment of Barserin Village, Erbil-Iraq. Zanco J Pure Appl Sci 34 (2): 6–21. [Google Scholar]
  • Darby S, et al. 2006. Residential radon and lung cancer detailed results of a collaborative analysis of individual data on 7148 persons with lung cancer and 14,208 persons without lung cancer from 13 epidemiologic studies in Europe. Scand J Work Environ Health 32(suppl 1): 1–83. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dosunmu GO, Ademola AK, Jidele PA, Ajayi KF, Olowofila IO. 2022. Measurements of radon and estimation of excess lifetime cancer risk in water-well samples along Iwaraja-Ifewara faults Southwestern, Nigeria. Int Res J Public Environ Health 9 (4): 120–124. [Google Scholar]
  • Duong VH, Vu HD, Nguyen D.T. et al. 2024. Seasonal 222Rn activity in spring water close to rare earth element and uranium mines in North Vietnam. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 333(5): 2537-2545. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Durridge. 2023. RAD7 Electronic Radon Detector User Manual. Durridge Company Inc. [Google Scholar]
  • EC. 2013. European Commission, Council Directive 2013/51/EURATOM of 22 October 2013 laying down requirements for the protection of the health of the general public with regard to radioactive substances in water intended for human consumption. Official Journal of the European Union L 296/12. Rome, Italy, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • Elzain AEA. 2014. Measurement of Radon-222 concentration levels in water samples in Sudan. Adv Appl Sci Res 5 (2): 229–234. [Google Scholar]
  • Elzain AEA. 2015. Radon exhalation rates from some building materials used in Sudan. Indoor Built Environ 24 (6): 852–860. [Google Scholar]
  • Elzain AEA. 2016. Measurements of indoor radon levels and dose estimation and lung cancer risk determination for workers in health centres of some towns in the Sudan. Am J Mod Phys 5 (4): 51. [Google Scholar]
  • Elzain AEA. 2017. Radon Monitoring in the Environment. Radon. InTech. [Google Scholar]
  • Elzain AEA. 2023. Assessment of environmental health risks due to indoor radon levels inside workplaces in Sudan. Int J Environ Anal Chem 103 (6): 1394–1410. ‏ [Google Scholar]
  • Elzain AEA, et al. 2019. Assessment of radioactivity from selected soil samples from Halfa Aljadida area, Sudan. Radiochim Acta 107 (6): 489–502. ‏ [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Elzain AEA, et al. 2019. Assessment of radioactivity from selected soil samples from Halfa Aljadida area, Sudan. Radiochim Acta 107 (6): 489–502. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • EUC. 2001. (European Union Commission) Commission recommendation of 20th December 2001 on the protection of the public against exposure to radon in drinking water. 2001/982/Euratom, L344/ 85–8. Official Journal of the European Commission. [Google Scholar]
  • EUC. 2013. European Commission, Council Directive 2013/51/EURATOM of 22 October 2013 laying down requirements for the protection of the health of the general public with regard to radioactive substances in water intended for human consumption. Official Journal of the European Union L 296/12. [Google Scholar]
  • Horváth, Bohus L, Urbani F, Marx G, Piróth A, Greaves E. 2000. Radon concentrations in hot spring waters in northern Venezuela. J Environ Radioact 47 (2): 127–133. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP. 1993. International Commission on Radiological Protection). Protection Against Radon-222 at Home and at Work. International Commission on Radiological Protection. (Annals of the ICRP); 23 (2), ICRP Publication; 65. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP. 1996. International Commission on Radiological Protection- Age-Dependent Doses to Members of the Public from Intake of Radionuclides: Part 5 Compilation of Ingestion and Inhalation Dose Coefficients. ICRP Publication 72. Ann ICRP 26 (1). [Google Scholar]
  • Idriss H, Salih I, Elzain AEA. 2020. Environmental radon mapping in Sudan, orderly review. J Taibah Univ Sci 14 (1): 1059–1066. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Isinkaye MO, Ajiboye Y. 2017. Assessment of annual effective dose due to radon concentrations in deep and shallow wells within Ekiti State, Nigeria. Radioprotection 52 (3): 167–170. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • ISO. 2023. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Water Quality—Radon-222. Part 4: Test Method Using Two-Phase Liquid Scintillation Counting. Institution BS. BS EN ISO 13164–4. [Google Scholar]
  • Kandari T, Aswal S, Prasad M, Bourai A, Ramola R. 2016. Estimation of annual effective dose from radon concentration along Main Boundary Thrust (MBT) in Garhwal Himalaya. J Radiat Res Appl Sci 9 (3): 228–233. [Google Scholar]
  • Kesäniemi J, et al. 2019. Exposure to environmental radionuclides associates with tissue-specific impacts on telomerase expression and telomere length. Sci Rep 9 (1). [Google Scholar]
  • Mamun A, Alazmi AS. 2022. Investigation of radon in groundwater and the corresponding human-health risk assessment in Northeastern Saudi Arabia. Sustainability 14 (21): 14515. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Massoud E, El-Taher A, Elzain AEA. 2020. Estimation of environmental radioactivity and radiation dose from exposure to radon in groundwater for inhabitants in Qassim Area, Saudi Arabia. Desalin Water Treat 205: 308–315. [Google Scholar]
  • Messier KP, Serre ML. 2016. Lung and stomach cancer associations with groundwater radon in North Carolina, USA. Int J Epidemiol, dyw 128. [Google Scholar]
  • Michael OM, et al. 2022. Annual effective dose assessment of radon in drinking water from Abandoned Tin and Cassiterite Mining site in Oyun, Kwara State, Nigeria. Pollution 8 (1): 181–192. [Google Scholar]
  • MOG. 1994. Meteorology Office-Gezira, Meteorology Office-Gezara (MOG). Rainfall records 1922–1994. [Google Scholar]
  • Nakano Y, et al. 2020. Measurement of the radon concentration in purified water in the Super-Kamiokande IV detector. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res Sect A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 977: 164297. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Nazaroff WW, Nero Jr., AV. (Eds.). 1988. Radon and Its Decay Products in Indoor Air. Pp. 65-69. Wiley, New York. [Google Scholar]
  • Niculita-Hirzel H, Goekce S, Jackson CE, Suarez G, Amgwerd L. 2021. Risk exposure during showering and water-saving showers. Water 13 (19): 2678. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Opoku-Ntim I, Gyampo O, Andam AB. 2019. Risk assessment of radon in some bottled water on the Ghanaian market. Environ Res Commun 1 (10): 105001. [Google Scholar]
  • Piao C, Tian M, Gao H, Gao Y, Ruan J, Wu L, Gao G, Yi L, Liu J. 2020. Effects of radon from hot springs on lymphocyte subsets in peripheral blood. Dose-Response 18 (1): 155932582090233. [Google Scholar]
  • Riudavets M, Garcia de Herreros M, Besse B, Mezquita L. 2022. Radon and lung cancer: current trends and future perspectives. Cancers 14 (13): 3142. [Google Scholar]
  • Sami OE, Mustafa YM, Shamseddin MA, Hilmi HS. 2014. Estimation and mapping of groundwater characteristics in Greater Wad-Medani Locality, Gezira State, Sudan. Int J Water Res Environ Eng 6 (5): 164–169. [Google Scholar]
  • Sukanya S, Joseph S, Noble J. 2021. Evaluation of radiation dose from radon ingestion and inhalation in groundwater of a small tropical river basin, Kerala, India. Isotopes Environ Health Stud 57 (2): 204–215. [Google Scholar]
  • Traoré I, et al. 2013. Assessment of activity and effective dose rate of 222Rn in several dwellings in Bamako, Mali. Radioprotection 48 (2): 277–284. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Tabar E, Yakut H. 2014. Radon measurements in water samples from the thermal springs of Yalova basin, Turkey, Journal of Radioanaly and Nucl Chem 299: 311319. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • UNDP. 2010. Socio-Economic and Opportunity Mapping Assessment Report for Gazira State 26th − 28th October 2010. [Google Scholar]
  • UNSCEAR. 2000. Report to the General Assembly, with scientific Annex B: Exposure from Natural Radiations Sources. New York: UN Publication. [Google Scholar]
  • UNSCEAR. 2008.United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effect of Atomic Radiation, Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation. Report to general assembly with scientific annexes. New York: UN Publications. [Google Scholar]
  • USEPA. 2022. Proposed radon in drinking water regulation. EPA. https://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/radionuclides-rule. Accessed 15 Aug 2022. [Google Scholar]
  • WHO. 2004. Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality. First Addendum to 3rd Edition. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2004; Vol. 1. [Google Scholar]
  • WHO. 2011. World Health Organization, Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality. 4th Ed. WHO press. [Google Scholar]

Cite this article as: Elzain AEA, Shady R, Yagob AA. 2024. Assessment of environmental radioactivity concentration and effective dose rates from radon gas exposure from water samples in Gezira State, Sudan. Radioprotection 59(3): 235–245

All Tables

Table 1

Average radon concentration, annual effective doses released to air, total annual effective doses for inhalation and ingestion and the annual effective doses rates for (infants, children and adults) from the water samples.

In the text
Table 2

A comparison of the study findings and global results.

In the text

All Figures

thumbnail Fig. 1

The study area in Gezira State of Sudan.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 2

The RAD7-H2O configuration device’s schematic illustration for measuring radon in water.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 3

Radon concentration from water samples (Bq.l−1).
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 4

Effective dose rate released from water to indoor air for various locations.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 5

Effective dose rate for ingestion due to radon concentration from water samples.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 6

Effective dose rate for inhalation due to radon concentration from water samples.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 7

Total effective dose rate at various locations in Gezira state.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 8

Effective dose rate for ingestion due to age groups.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 9

Radon concentration from water vs effective dose rate for ingestion due to age groups.
In the text

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.