2023 | 76/2 | 87–103 | 9 Figs. | 5 Tabs. | 4 Suppls. | www.geologia-croatica.hr Journal of the Croatian Geological Survey and the Croatian Geological Society 1. INTRODUCTION The pan-European pilot project URGE was carried out with the aim of assessing the quality of urban soil through geochemical mapping in different European cities. The main objective of the project was to harmonise the methodology for urban geochemi- cal surveys and to compare the results obtained at European level. The Geochemical Expert Group of EuroGeoSurveys coordinated the implementation of the whole project, and the Croatian Geo- logical Survey (HGI-CGS) carried out the surveys in the city of Sisak, Croatia. According to ŠORŠA & HALAMIĆ (2014), the concentration of PTEs in the topsoil (0-10 cm) in the city of Sisak and its rural surroundings is the result of the geological back- ground and strong anthropogenic influences caused by the long urban, transport, and industrial history of Sisak. Geochemical mapping of the topsoil in the city of Sisak was extended to inves- tigation of the subsoil layers. The aim of the extended investiga- tions was to determine the changes in the concentration of PTEs in the soil by depth and to assess the potential risk to human health and the environment. In addition, the geochemical frac- tions of Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Zn in the subsurface soil layers were determined using the Community Reference Bureau of Reference Comparison of urban and rural soils based on speciation of heavy metals by BCR sequential extraction procedure: A case study in the historical and industrial city of Sisak, Croatia Ajka Šorša1, Goran Durn2, Anita Grizelj1,*, Josip Halamić1 and Lucija Prša Gazilj3 1 Croatian Geological Survey, Sachsova 2, Zagreb, Croatia; (*corresponding author: agrizelj@hgi-cgs.hr) 2 Faculty of Mining, Geology and Petroleum Engineering, University of Zagreb, Pierottijeva 6, Zagreb, Croatia 3 Chalmers University of Technology, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Gothenburg, Sweden doi: 10.4154/gc.2023.06 Abstract Within the framework of the pan-European project “URban GEochemistry (URGE) in Europe – Soil, children, health”, pedological and geochemical investigations of the soils of the city of Sisak and its adjacent surroundings were carried out, and three urban and two rural soil profiles were examined. The mineralogical composition and concentration of selected potentially toxic elements (PTEs) Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn in the soil were determined. The Community Reference Bureau of Reference (BCR) sequential extraction procedure (SEP) of these PTEs was under- taken and the potential risk to human health and the environment was assessed. The concentrations of Cr and Ni are generally similar in urban and rural soil profiles, while the concentrations of Cu, Pb and Zn in soil horizons/layers are higher in urban profiles. The extract- ed fractions of PTEs gave the following general distribution: in urban soil profiles residual (RES) > reducible (ORG) or oxidisable (FEMN) > exchangeable (CARB), except for Cu where ORG > RES > FEMN > CARB, while in rural soil profiles RES > FEMN or ORG > CARB, except for Pb where FEMN > RES or ORG > CARB. The differences between soils in urban and rural profiles depend mainly on the historical land use, i.e. on the duration and intensity of anthropogenic influences on the soil and, to a lesser ex- tent, on the geogenic origin of the parent material and the pedogenic processes. The studied elements in the urban soil profiles are predominantly of anthropogenic origin, indicating a pos- sible influence of the ancient settlements of Segestica and Siscia and of heavy industry in the 20th century. The anthropogenic influences on the rural profiles are low and geogenic influences dominate. Risks to the environment were assessed in the soil profiles based on PTE concentrations in the CARB fraction and the sum of the CARB, ORG and FEMN fractions from BCR SEP. All calculated risks to human health and the environment were rated as no-risk, very low risk and low risk. sequential extraction procedure. The exchangeable fraction, the reducible fraction, the oxidisable fraction and the residual were determined by BCR SEP in the soil horizons/layers of three ur- ban and two rural soil profiles. In the broadest sense, the term urban soils refers to soils that have developed in urban areas or under strong anthropogenic in- fluence. Depending on the objective of a study dealing with urban soils, there are many different definitions of the term (CRAUL, 1992; SOBOCKA, 2003; LEHMANN & STAHR, 2007; POUYAT et al., 2010; GREINERT, 2015; GREINERT & KOSTECKI, 2019; O’RIORDAN et al., 2021). Here, the term “urban soils” is used for all soils in the urban area of Sisak, while the term “rural soils” is used for the soils in the adjacent rural area of Sisak. The purpose of SEP is to study how metals are released into the environment under different environmental conditions. Knowing the total concentration of a metal in soil is not sufficient to accurately assess its impact on the environment and its poten- tial contamination. The mobility and bioavailability of a metal are crucial for soil contamination. The SEP is a chemical tech- nique that successively extracts metals and other elements from Article history: Manuscript received March 21, 2023 Revised manuscript accepted June 06, 2023 Available online June 16, 2023 Keywords: SEP, potentially toxic elements, soil profiles, anthropogenic influences, risk assessment G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 76/288 solid samples (soil, sediment, waste) in order of solubility in dif- ferent geochemical fractions. Each successive fraction dissolves a particular phase with metals bound to it and removes them from the system. This method can be used to extract metals sequen- tially in 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7 fractions. There are several developed methods for SEP and the most commonly used are Tessier, BCR, Short, Galán, and Geological Society of Canada (GCS) (ZIM- MERMAN & WEINDORF, 2010). The European Commission (2001) has proposed the BCR SEP method, which differs from the Tessier method (TESSIER et al., 1979) by merging Tessier’s first and second fractions i.e., the exchangeable and the carbonate fractions (URE et al., 1993; ZIMMERMAN & WEINDORF, 2010). The aim of developing BCR SEP is to compare the results of SEP of sediment and soil analysis data at EU level. BCR SEP defines three successive ex- tractions of metals from the sample and residual. Fraction 1 – CARB extracts metal ions adsorbed in the soil and metals bound to carbonates. Fraction 2 – FEMN separates metals bound to iron or manganese oxides that form nodules, concretions, cement be- tween particles or a coating around particles. Fraction 3 – ORG comprises metals bound to organic material and sulphides (TES- SIER et al., 1979; GLEYZES et al., 2002). Organic matter readily accumulates metals that are degraded under oxidation conditions. The last fraction is residual – RES. Once the first three fractions are removed, the residue should consist of primary and second- ary minerals containing metals in the crystal lattice. These me- tals are not expected to be released into the environment under conditions prevailing in nature. Contaminated soils or soils enriched with PTEs pose a po- tential risk of poisoning some plants, soil microorganisms, ani- mals, and humans. Human health can be threatened by contami- nated soils in several ways: by inhalation, through the skin, or by consumption of food and drink. A potential environmental risk is defined as the possibility of harming flora, fauna or human health through exposure to high concentrations of harmful ele- ments (RAPANAT et al., 2008). The potential risk to the environ- ment also depends on the mobility, bioavailability and ecotoxi city of PTEs. The risk of poisoning is lower when PTEs are fixed in the soil and not mobile. Their release into the mobile phase of the soil depends mainly on the Eh value, pH and buffer capacity of the soil, then on the content of Mn-Fe oxyhydroxide, clay and o rganic material in the soil. Based on the results of the BCR SEP analyses, the risk of a potential mobilisation of PTEs into the environment could be assessed. The potential risk of release of PTEs into the mobile phase was calculated as a function of the CARB fraction (RATH et al., 2009; LIU et al., 2010) and as a function of the sum of the CARB, FEMN and ORG fractions (MIKO et al., 2003). According to the study by ŠORŠA (2014) on the distribution of elements in topsoil, their origin and potential risk for the en- vironment and human health, 5 PTEs were selected for BCR SEP. The first was Cr, which is predominantly of geogenic origin, the second was Ni, which is partly of geogenic and partly of anthro- pogenic origin, while the remaining three elements (Cu, Zn and Pb) are predominantly of anthropogenic origin. The objective of the study was to determine any differences in the distribution of these elements by depth in soils in urban and rural soil profiles, their origin in the soil profiles, and the sources of possible con- tamination. In addition, the risk of release of metals into the en- vironment will be assessed based on the results of the BCR SEP. 1.1 Study area The city of Sisak lies at latitude 45° 29’ N and longitude 16° 20’ E and is located in the Posavina region, 57 km south-east of Za- greb (Fig. 1). The study area includes the urban part of the city and the adjacent rural surroundings. The terrain is lowland. The largest part of the study area lies at an altitude of about 100 m above sea level and the Rivers Kupa, Sava and Odra occasionally flood the lower parts of the Sisak area. Quaternary sediments predominate in the region of the city of Sisak. The deposits com- Figure 1. Geographic location of the study area of Sisak, Croatia. G eologia C roatica Šorša et al.: Comparison of urban and rural soils based on speciation of heavy metals by BCR sequential extraction procedure ... 89 prise carbonate alluvium of the River Sava in the east, siliciclas- tic alluvium of the Rivers Kupa and Odra in the west and north, and loess deposits in the central part, within the large meander of the River Kupa (Fig. 2a; PIKIJA, 1987a, b). Based on the pedo- logical map, hydromorphic soils, i.e., the classes of pseudogleyic, undeveloped, semigley and gley soils predominate in the rural surroundings of Sisak, and technogenic soils dominate in the urban part (Fig. 2b; HUSNJAK, 2012). The climate in Sisak is moderately warm and rainy, without extreme dry periods (LISAC & HERIĆ-NEKIĆ, 1995). According to the Sisak meteorological station, the most frequent wind directions are NE 15.4% of the time and N 13.0% of the time. In accordance with the official land use in the city of Sisak (KAMINSKI-KIRŠ, 2002), the urban soil profiles PR1, PR2 and PR3 are located in the parks and recreation areas, and the rural soil profiles PR4 and PR5 are placed in the area with soils for ag- ricultural production. According to the historical and current land use observed during fieldwork, the urban area of Sisak includes “the old urban area; new urban area, industrial area, and partly urban area around the industrial facilities”, while the rural area includes “the predominantly rural area, and mixed area: urban, rural, woods, groves and similar” (Fig. 2c). According to the cur- rent land use, the urban soil profiles are located in the urban area and the rural soil profiles in the rural area of Sisak. The soils of the three urban soil profiles PR1, PR2 and PR3 and the two rural soil profiles PR4 and PR5 are classified accord- ing to the WRB (IUSS Working Group WRB, 2014) and the Cro- atian Soil Classification (CSC; HUSNJAK, 2014) and already presented in HUSNJAK et al. (2018) and ŠORŠA (2014) (Tab. 1). 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS 2.1. Sampling The locations of the profiles were chosen to achieve an even dis- tribution of soil profiles throughout the study area, consistent with historical and current land use, geological, and pedological characteristics (Fig. 2a, b, c; Tab. 1). Two profiles PR1 and PR2 were located in the old urban area on the terrace sediments of the River Kupa and were classified as Urbic and Linic technosols, respectively. Profile PR3 was excavated on the boundary between the new urban area and the partially urban area around the indus- trial facilities on the loess and classified as a Hypereutral regosol. Figure 2. a) Geological map (PIKIJA, 1987a, b), b) pedological map (HUSNJAK, 2012) and c) the map showing historical and current land use (ŠORŠA, 2014) of the study area in Sisak with the locations of the soil profiles. Table 1. Classification of urban and rural soils from profiles in Sisak according to the World Reference Base for soil resources 2014 (IUSS Working Group WRB, 2014) and the Croatian Soil Classification (HUSNJAK, 2014) taken from (HUSNJAK et al., 2018; ŠORŠA, 2014). Type of soil profile Soil profile WRB classification Croatian Soil Classification Urban soil profiles PR1 Urbic Technosols (Loamic, Calcaric, Grossartefactic, Humic) Humus-accumulative soils; the type Rendzina PR2 Linic Technosol (Calcaric, Ruptic) Technogenic soils; the type Deposol PR3 Hypereutric Regosol (Siltic, Relocatic, Ruptic) over Hypereutric Relictistagnic Retisol (Siltic) Humus-accumulative soils; the type Rendzina Rural soil profiles PR4 Haplic Fluvisol (Anthric, Calcaric, Hypereutric, Siltic) Hydromorphic soil (Semiglay) PR5 Haplic Fluvisol (Anthric, Humic, Hypereutric, Endoarenic) Hydromorphic soil (Semiglay) G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 76/290 Two profiles were excavated in predominantly rural areas - PR4 in the south, on the carbonate alluvium of the Sava River, and PR5 in the north on the siliciclastic alluvium of the River Kupa and both were classified as Haplic fluvisols. The soil profiles in the urban areas (PR1, PR2 and PR3) have only weakly developed horizons and were therefore described and sampled mainly in recognised layers. The urban soil profile PR1 was located in the park in the Roman Siscia area. The entire profile PR1 is anthropogenic, carbonate, and the soil is black. The profile was dug to a depth of 120 cm and 1 horizon and 5 layers were sampled. The urban soil profile PR2 was taken in the park near the old bridge. The part of the profile to a depth of 105 cm was excavated and then drilled between 105 and 120 cm. The par- ent material for the soil is mainly of anthropogenic origin. Five soil layers were sampled. The urban soil profile PR3 was located in the park in front of the school in Caprag. It was dug to 102 cm and the rest was drilled to 200 cm. The settlement of Caprag was built in the 50s and 60s of the last century for the workers of the ironworks of Sisak. Therefore, the upper part of the profile is an- thropogenically influenced. Six soil samples were collected from four horizons and two layers. The rural soil profiles (PR4 and PR5) have developed hori- zons. Rural soil profile PR4 was located in the south-eastern part of the study area on agricultural land and about 200 m from the River Sava. It was dug to a depth of 115 cm and further drilled to 220 cm. Six soil samples were collected in six horizons. Rural soil profile PR5 is located in the north-western part of the study area, about 1,300 m from the River Kupa. Soil profile PR5 was only drilled to a depth of 130 cm, and three soil samples were collected. The amount of anthropogenically sourced detritus (bricks, stones, pieces of iron and other material of anthropogenic origin) was often very large in urban areas, so a larger volume of soil weighing up to 4 kg was sampled in urban soil profiles. In soil profiles in rural areas, the weight of the soil samples was about 2.5 kg. Twenty-six soil samples were collected from identified soil horizons and layers. 2.2. Analyses The samples were air dried at room temperature, gently crushed, sieved through a 2-mm sieve, homogenised, powdered and split for all analyses. The mineralogical composition was determined by X-ray powder diffraction (XRD) in the laboratory of the Croatian Geo- logical Survey. The samples for XRD analyses were ground us- ing a McCrone mill. Semi-quantitative XRD analysis was per- formed using a PANalytical vertical X-ray goniometer (type X’Pert) equipped with a Cu-tube and PW 3018/00 PIXcel detec- tor. The experimental conditions were: 45 kV, 40 mA, primary beam divergence 1/4° and continuous scan (step 0.02 °2θ/s). The semi-quantitative composition of the samples was carried out ac- cording to the method of SCHULTZ (1964). The 5 g of samples for chemical analyses were digested in 90 ml aqua regia, then heated and boiled in a bath (at 95°C) for one hour. After cooling, up to 300 ml of 5% HCl was added to the solution. Chemical analyses were performed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy (ICP MS) for a range of 53 chemical elements at ACME Analytical Laboratories, Vancouver, Canada (the procedure is described in detail in ŠORŠA, 2014; ŠORŠA et al., 2017). To determine the different forms of metals in soils, a slightly modified three-step procedure described in the Report EUR 19775 EN of the EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2001) was used for acid-soluble, reducible and oxidisable soil fractions. What re- mained after these three steps is the residual fraction (RES) which was analysed after the aqua regia treatment (NIEUWEN- HUIZE et al., 1991). This treatment does not completely dissolve all the remaining mineral phases. The efficiency of the digestion varies from element to element and depends on the mineralogy of the sample material. The result obtained is therefore conside- red as near-total. The extraction scheme is presented in Tab. 2. It should be noted that the results obtained are operationally defined and therefore the significance of the analytical results is related to the extraction scheme used. The sequential extraction scheme recommended by BCR is sufficiently repeatable and reproducible for use in speciation studies (DAVIDSON et al., 1994). The resulting solutions were analysed for Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn on an AAnalyst 700 Perkin Elmer flame absorption spectrome- ter (AAS) using an air-acetylene flame. The sum of all fractions gave the total metal content of the sample. For statistical purposes analytical data, the value of which was below the DL was assigned half of the DL value. 2.2.1. Quality control Quality control (QC) for chemical analyses with ICP MS was car- ried out for all topsoil and soil samples from soil profiles collected within the project URGE in the Sisak study area. The coefficient of variation of the precision of the technique and the accuracy of the standards were satisfactory (the QC is described in detail in ŠORŠA, 2014; ŠORŠA et al., 2017). Soil samples from soil profiles were analysed in geochemi- cal fractions obtained by BCR SEP for the five metals Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn with the AAS. The correlation of the results obtained with both analytical techniques can serve as an additional quali ty control. The comparison of the results can be done by graphical representation or statistical tests such as the t-test or the Wilcoxon test (REIMANN et al., 2008). Due to the small number of sam- ples, only a graphical representation of the comparison of the measurement results was made and no statistical tests were per- formed. Comparing the results of the analysis of samples mea- sured with the ICP MS with the results of the analysis of the same samples measured with the AAS, a slight difference in the mea- surements can be observed (Fig. 3). The concentrations of Cr de- termined with ICP MS were higher than those measured with AAS for all samples. The results for Cu and Pb agreed, except in profile PR2 and partly in PR1, where the element contents deter- mined with AAS are generally slightly higher than those with ICP MS. Nickel and Zn behave in the same way in the two sets of results. In profiles PR1 and PR2 these metals have higher con- centrations when analysed with AAS, and their concentrations measured with AAS are lower than those determined with ICP MS in profiles PR2, PR3 and PR4. Table 2. Sequential extraction scheme combined with the residual fraction. Step Reagent Soil phase Label 1. Acetic acid (0.11 mol/l) Acid soluble CARB 2. Hydroxilammonium chloride (0.5 mol/l) Reducible FEMN 3. Hydrogen peroxide (8.8 mol/l), followed by extraction with ammonium acetate (1 mol/l) Oxidisable ORG 4. Aqua regia (HNO3 : HCl = 1:3) Residual RES G eologia C roatica Šorša et al.: Comparison of urban and rural soils based on speciation of heavy metals by BCR sequential extraction procedure ... 91 Chromium shows the greatest difference in the measure- ments with AAS and ICP MS. The reason for this result is the concentration of Cr in resistant minerals that are difficult to dis- solve in acids (chromite, magnetite, ilmenite). Aqua regia was used to dissolve the soil sample before measurement with ICP MS and to dissolve the residual fraction for measurement with AAS. A slight change in the ratio of HCl: HNO3, the temperature or the dissolution time probably led to a deviation in the measure- ments. The differences in the measurements for Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn were small. On average, the differences in the measurements were small and the measured concentrations of the metals showed the same trend of increase or decrease for both analytical tech- niques. The precision of BCR SEP was determined by measuring a soil sample with AAS in three consecutive replicates. The accu- racy of the results of SEP was determined by comparison with a standard sample BCR-701 (Tab. 3). Certified and measured con- centrations of the standard sample BCR-701 for Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn by geochemical fractions in soil samples have a large overlap (PUEYO et al., 2001). The lowest accuracy was found for Cr, probably due to the resistivity of Cr minerals. Other PTEs show generally good accuracy. 2.3. Risk assessment The risk to the environment and human health was assessed based on the results of BCR SEP in the soil profiles according to Risk Assessment Code (RAC) which includes only CARB frac- tion and according to the sum of the concentration of the CARB, Table 3. Quality control for the BCR SEP - Certified and measured concentrations of the standard sample BCR-701 in urban and rural soil profiles. Element Concentration in standard BCR - 701 Geochemical fraction CARB FEMN ORG RES SUM Cr Measured 0.75 15.7 136 52.4 205 Certified 2.26 45.7 143 62.5 253 Cu Measured 33.3 80.9 82.0 48.4 245 Certified 49.3 124 124 38.5 267 Ni Measured 11.8 18.8 18.9 41.0 90.5 Certified 15.4 26.6 15.3 41.4 98.7 Pb Measured 5.06 84.6 19.8 39.7 149 Certified 3.18 126 9.30 11.0 149 Zn Measured 154 115 52.6 100 422 Certified 205 114 45.7 95.0 460 Figure 3. Quality control for elements analysed with two analytical techniques by graphic comparison of Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn concentration measurements ob- tained by AAS and ICP MS. G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 76/292 FEMN and ORG fractions. In both risk assessment methods, the horizons or layers in the soil profiles were treated the same, they were all considered as surface horizons/layers. The potential risk to human health is in urban soil profiles due to land use for rec- reational purposes and in rural areas due to cultivation of crops for human and animal consumption. In addition, mobilisation of metals in case of contamination in deeper horizons/layers poses a risk to groundwater during the flood season. 2.3.1. Risk Assessment Code The assessment of risk to the environment due to the potential mobilisation of PTEs from soil can be based on the metal con- centration in the carbonate fraction obtained by the BCR (RATH et al., 2009; LIU et al., 2010). In the CARB fraction, the metals are only weakly bound to the surface of the soil particles or in- corporated in the structure of minerals soluble in acids and can be easily mobilised into the environment. The formula for calcu- lating the content of metal in a given fraction is E = (CM /ƩCM) x 100; where (E) is the percentage of metal extraction in the frac- tion, (CM) is the metal concentration in the fraction, and (ƩCM) is the total metal concentration in the whole sample (ƩCM = CARB + FEMN + ORG + RES) (LIU et al., 2010). The risk as- sessment of metal release to the environment is based on the per- centage of extraction (E) of the selected metal in the CARB frac- tion. There is no risk if the E <1%. Low, medium, high and very high risk applies to E = 1-10%, E = 11-30%, E = 31-50% and E >50%, respectively (RATH et al., 2009). 2.3.2. Risk assessment based on the sum of concentrations in the fractions CARB, FEMN and ORG MESIĆ et al. (2008) proposed legal limits for total metal concen- trations in soils according to land use. The proposed classification of land use distinguishes soils for agricultural production, chil- dren’s playgrounds, residential areas, parks and recreation areas, and areas for industrial and commercial purposes. The BCR SEP of samples from soil profiles revealed four fractions in which the PETs Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn were bound. Metals in RES fraction can be mobilised only by strong acids, but such conditions are unlikely in the environment. A realistic assessment of the risk to the environment and human health was obtained by summing the concentration of the first three frac- tions: CARB + FEMN + ORG (MIKO et al., 2003), and compar- ing these with the prescribed limits for total concentration ac- cording to land use. HOOKER & NATHANAIL (2006) suggested that environmental risk can be expressed as relative risk (RR) for selected elements (i), calculated using the following formula: RRi = (total concentration in soil)i / (soil target value) for each land use. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A soil profile in a naturally developed soil has characteristic ho- rizons that depend, among others, on pedogenesis on a particular parent material, while a soil profile in an urban area usually has no formed horizons, only layers (Figs. 4 and 5). In the urban soil profile PR1, the anthropogenic influences are so strong that the soil is a mixture of soil and anthropogenic material. In PR2, the upper layers have been recently disturbed and filled with mate- rial brought from elsewhere. Soil profile PR3 is under anthropo- genic influence in its upper half and shows natural pedogenesis in its lower half. The profiles in the urban area (PR1, PR2 and PR3) have a shallow surface horizon that developed in a relatively short time. It formed in PR1 after the last excavation in 1974, in PR2 the upper layers were backfilled in 2009 and in PR3 during the construction of the Caprag settlement in the 1950s and 1960s. Soil profiles PR4 and PR5, which are exposed in rural areas, have a natural pedogenic development. Their surface horizon is thicker Figure 4. Urban soil profiles PR1, PR2 and PR3 with their determined horizons/layers. Figure 5. Rural soil profiles PR4 and PR5 with their determined horizons. G eologia C roatica Šorša et al.: Comparison of urban and rural soils based on speciation of heavy metals by BCR sequential extraction procedure ... 93 and also developed under anthropogenic influence (ploughing), but is genetically related to the rest of the profile. The influences on the pedogenic development of the soil pro- files were multiple. The urban soil profiles PR1 and PR2 are lo- cated on the river terrace, PR3 on the slightly elevated loess and the rural profiles PR4 and PR5 in the floodplain. The parent ma- terial was brought in by the Rivers Kupa and Sava or by wind, and deposited in their alluvium. The transport and sedimentation were of varying intensity. In addition to the geogenic background, there are numerous anthropogenic influences, which include a long urban history, the construction of dikes for flood protection, the various embank- ments of streams, ravines and profiles, and industrial develop- ment. The pedogenic development of the profiles has been strongly influenced by surface and high-level groundwater. For this reason, mainly hydromorphic soils have developed. In such soils, the migration of ions, colloids and other small particles to the depth of the profile was facilitated. All this has influenced the oscillation and irregularity of the mineralogical composition and the amount of PTEs along the horizons/layers in these soils. 3.1. Urban soils 3.1.1. Mineralogy The following minerals were determined in the samples from the urban soil profiles: quartz, phyllosilicates, calcite, dolomite, pla- gioclase and cristobalite (Fig. 6 and Supplements 1; Supplements 2). Quartz is the predominant mineral in all profiles. Besides quartz, phyllosilicates were the most abundant mineral phases in the soil profiles. Most of the samples contain 14 Å, 10 Å and 7 Å diffraction maxima that are characteristic of phyllosilicates. The diffraction maxima of 14 Å indicates the presence of swelling minerals (smectite and/or vermiculite) and/or chlorite. Diffrac- tion maxima of 10 Å indicates illitic material, and 7 Å indicates the presence of kaolinite and/or chlorite (MOORE & RAYN- OLDS,1997; STARKEY et al., 1984). In sample PR2-II (15-33 cm) the diffraction maximum of 14 Å is not visible. Samples PR1- IV (70-100 cm) and PR1-V (100-120 cm) do not contain the dif- fraction maximum of 7 Å. The phyllosilicate content is highest in profile PR3. In PR1, the phyllosilicate content is largely uni- form over the entire depth. In general, the content of phyllosili- cate increases with depth in profiles PR2 and PR3. Calcite and dolomite are present in soils of profiles PR1 and PR2, but were not found in PR3. Plagioclase is present in PR1, PR2 to a lesser extent than in the soil of PR3, which is probably a consequence of the different parent materials since profiles are located on dif- ferent sediments (Fig. 2a, PIKIJA, 1987a, b) or more intense weathering. A low content of cristobalite was only observed in soil profile PR3. The cristobalite in profile PR3 located on loess (Fig. 2a, PIKIJA, 1987a, b) is probably of volcanic origin. As there are several potential cristobalite sources within a relatively short distance of 5 to 15 km from soil profile PR3, the cristobalite may have been deposited together with other loess material. The urban profiles PR1, PR2 and PR3 show anthropogenic influences in their mineralogical composition (Fig. 2b, c). Profile PR1 has a uniform content of all minerals throughout its depth, which is a consequence of the mixing of materials due to constant digging over. In the layer PR2-II (15-33 cm), the calcite content is greatly increased and the phyllosilicate content is reduced due to anthropogenic influences. This layer was filled with carbonate sand mixed with the existing parent material. The layer is then covered with nylon and compacted soil to form the surface layer PR2-I (0-15 cm). The lower part of profile PR2 is natural. Soil profile PR3 is disturbed to a depth of 67 cm in the upper three layers and therefore contains less phyllosilicates than in the lower three layers, which are natural. The mineralogical composition in the urban soil profiles PR1 and PR2 is consistent with the min- eralogical composition of the siliciclastic alluvium of the Rivers Kupa and Odra on which profiles are located (Fig. 2a, PIKIJA, 1987a, b). Similarly, the mineralogy of profile PR3 also corre- sponds to the mineralogical composition of loess (Fig. 2a, PIKIJA, 1987a, b; ŠORŠA et al., 2018). Anthropogenic influences are large in profile PR1 and in the upper part of profiles PR2 and PR3. 3.1.2. Total concentration of the selected PTEs As soil profiles vary according to parent material, pedogenic de- velopment, anthropogenic influence and land use (Figs. 2a, b, c), there is not even much regularity in the content of selected PTEs Figure 6. The mineral composition in soil samples in urban and rural soil profiles determined by X-ray diffraction. G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 76/294 Soil profile PR1 has significantly higher levels of PTEs: Cu, Pb and Zn than the other profiles (Fig. 7; Tab. 4). According to the geochemical maps of the spatial distribution of elements on the surface (ŠORŠA & HALAMIĆ, 2014), profile PR1 is located in the area with increased Cu and Pb concentration. In this pro- file, the surface horizon is not enriched with PTEs, their concen- (Fig. 7; Tab. 4). The surface horizon of soil profiles in urban areas often has elevated levels of contaminants (LEHMANN & STAHR, 2007). The concentration and distribution of selected PTEs along the horizons and layers in urban soil profiles PR1, PR2 and PR3 were strongly influenced by human excavation and contamination (Fig. 8). Figure 7. The concentration of the Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn in soil samples in urban and rural soil profiles measured with ICP MS. G eologia C roatica Šorša et al.: Comparison of urban and rural soils based on speciation of heavy metals by BCR sequential extraction procedure ... 95 tration is elevated deeper in the profile. All elements with in- creased content in the PR1 profile belong to anthropogenic factor 1 (Heavy industry), and the element Pb also belongs to anthropo- genic factor 6 (Roman mints) (factors defined by ŠORŠA et al., 2017). The concentration of all PTEs by layer does not vary sig- nificantly, except for the enrichment in the layer at 70-100 cm depth (Figs. 4 and 7; Tab. 4). In the urban soil profile PR1, PTEs have accumulated in the soil over a long period of time. It is lo- cated in the park, close to a parcel of archaeological excavations dating back to Roman times. The land has been in continuous use for over 2,000 years. It was once the site of the Roman Siscia, and for the last 150 years (until 1974) it was a cemetery. Today it is a city park near industrial facilities. Therefore, the amount and dis- tribution of PTEs in profile PR1 are mainly of anthropogenic or- igin (ŠORŠA, 2014). Copper, Pb and Zn are elevated due to smelt- ing furnaces and mints in Roman times, industry, transport, fossil fuel combustion and other wastes. It is difficult to determine the extent of the influence of cemeteries on PTEs concentrations in the profile. In the absence of detailed descriptions of burial methods and the use of coffins, gravestones, etc., one can only speculate on the amount of PTEs of “cemetery” origin. In soil profile PR2, the surface horizon is slightly enriched in all elements compared to the underlying horizons (Fig. 7; Tab. 4). Moreover, the concentration of all selected metals, after the previously described drop from the surface layer, increases with depth, with slight variations. The anthropogenic formation of the upper two horizons/layers and the strong influence of the third layer after the flower exhibition in 2009, when the upper two lay- ers were partially filled, had the greatest influence on observed variation in the content of the elements at depth. Therefore, the contents of the elements of the surface horizon and the surround- ing area cannot be compared. The surface horizon of PR3 is slightly enriched in Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn compared to the rest of the profile. This content in the surface horizon is consistent with the geochemical maps of the surrounding area (ŠORŠA & HALAMIĆ, 2014). Most of the Table 4. The concentration of the Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn in soil samples in urban and rural soil profiles measured by AAS and ICP MS. Type PTEs Cr Cu Ni Pb Zn mg/kg Soil profile AAS ICP MS AAS ICP MS AAS ICP MS AAS ICP MS AAS ICP MS U rb an so il pr ofi le s PR1-A (0-12cm) 18.4 23.0 97.9 93.7 40.6 26.1 144 129 142 124 PR1-I (12-29cm) 18.2 22.0 125 128 40.5 26.7 176 199 147 141 PR1-II (29-50cm) 17.6 21.0 146 141 40.7 23.4 196 180 159 144 PR1-III (50-70cm) 18.1 21.0 142 146 37.6 24.6 210 182 148 13 PR1-IV (70-100cm) 17.6 23.0 147 156 41.9 24.1 226 273 150 148 PR1-V (100-120cm) 17.6 21.0 157 149 42.5 22.8 235 191 157 134 PR2-I (0-15cm) 32.6 41.0 52.2 38.8 46.1 28.2 88.2 76.5 197 180 PR2-II (15-33cm) 12.7 17.0 35.9 25.6 32.7 18.7 47.5 36.1 78.8 68.9 PR2-III (33-60cm) 13.7 22.0 32.7 17.5 44.6 29.1 34.9 17.9 70.5 58.6 PR2-IV (60-88cm) 27.2 37.0 45.6 30.3 62.2 43.2 64.6 32.6 105 94.2 PR2-V (88-120cm) 22.0 38.0 46.5 31.5 59.0 45.6 46.7 33.5 101 92.8 PR3-A (0-14) 25.5 34.0 25.7 26.2 23.3 30.9 42.8 43.8 139 175 PR3-I (14-28cm) 26.1 35.0 21.4 21.9 23.3 27.6 32.1 34.2 89.2 112 PR3-II (28-67cm) 29.2 36.0 22.2 22.9 27.1 29.8 19.0 20.7 64.0 86.1 PR3-CG (67-130cm) 30.2 42.0 21.1 22.2 22.7 32.2 11.9 17.2 54.9 73.7 PR3-Cg (Gr) (130-160cm) 26.6 38.0 20.1 20.7 16.1 20.3 12.2 17.9 32.3 42.2 PR3-Cg (160-200cm) 32.5 45.0 24.1 28.0 24.6 30.8 11.8 19.5 40.6 56.0 Ru ra l s oi l p ro fil es PR4-P (0-32cm) 21.0 22.0 22.7 19.6 26.1 32.0 19.7 26.2 82.4 91.1 PR4-I/C (32-58cm) 21.0 23.0 21.0 18.4 23.9 31.5 20.9 20.0 50.8 59.9 PR4-II/C (58-90cm) 26.6 33.0 26.5 27.6 30.9 43.1 26.6 28.3 70.2 83.7 PR4-III/C/G (90-115cm) 34.1 44.0 27.7 30.9 37.4 53.7 24.1 30.7 84.3 106.6 PR4-IV/C/G (115-160cm) 22.9 25.0 21.4 18.5 30.7 35.1 24.4 18.4 55.1 62.5 PR4-V/C/G (160-200cm) 18.9 20.0 18.2 14.3 27.9 27.5 22.4 14.5 42.5 46.9 PR5-P (0-30cm) 22.7 29.0 20.9 20.7 28.9 30.8 25.4 27.4 63.0 76.4 PR5-G (30-80cm) 22.4 31.0 21.3 21.8 24.3 32.9 13.7 25.8 61.3 77.2 PR5-G (80-120cm) 21.4 30.0 27.9 30.9 30.6 38.1 21.4 24.0 65.6 83.6 Figure 8. Heatmap of total concentration of the Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn in soil samples in urban and rural soil profiles measured with AAS. G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 76/296 PTEs belong to anthropogenic factor 1 (Heavy industry) (ŠORŠA et al., 2017). At a depth of 67 cm in the PR3 profile, the concen- tration of Zn drops sharply, while the concentrations of Cr, Cu, Ni and Pb decrease only slightly. At this depth, there are no anthropogenic influences and they originate from the parent material. 3.1.3. BCR Sequential extraction procedure of the selected PTEs The concentration of Cr, Ni, Pb, and Zn in the urban soil profile PR1 is highest in the fraction RES, while the concentration of Cu is highest in the fraction ORG (Fig. 9; Supplements 4.a). This is followed by the fractions RES for Cu and ORG, in which in ad- dition to Cu, Cr and partly Zn, Ni and Pb are bound. Profile PR1 is richest in humus and nitrogen (ŠORŠA, 2014), so the content of metals bound in the fraction ORG is significantly higher there than in the other profiles (KHADHAR et al., 2020). In the FEMN fraction there is a lot of Ni, Pb and Zn and Cu in much lower concentrations, and Cr is almost absent in the lower two layers. Zinc is almost evenly bound in the FEMN and ORG fractions, and the concentrations of Pb, Ni, Cu and Cr decrease to zero, respectively, in the upper horizon/layers. Nickel in the fraction RES is predominantly of geogenic origin and bound to silicates since nickel of anthropogenic origin has a high affinity for binding to Fe- and Mn-oxy-hydroxides (McGRATH, 1997). This is probably the reason why its content in the FEMN fraction is elevated in the lower two layers of profile PR1. Nickel concen- tration in the FEMN fraction is related to the Fe2O3 and MnO content in these horizons/layers (Supplements 3; ŠORŠA, 2014). With increasing Fe-Mn oxide content, the Ni concentration in the FEMN fraction also increases. Lead concentration in PR1 is sig- nificantly higher than in the other profiles. Lead of anthropogenic origin, especially Pb from metallurgical processes, has a higher binding affinity to Fe-Mn-oxides than to organic material (ET- TLER et al., 2005). Consequently, although the profile PR1 con- tains a high content of humus and nitrogen, more Pb is present in the FEMN than in the fraction ORG. The lowest concentration of all elements was found in the CARB fraction. It is associated with a low content of Zn and Pb, then with Ni and Cu in the lower layers, while Cr is absent. There is not much regularity in terms of fractions and profile depth. In general, the fraction RES decreased and the fraction ORG of Cu and Cr as well as the fraction FEMN of Ni, Pb and Zn increased. The amount of PTEs in the fractions in the urban soil profile PR1 is not the result of pedogenic processes in the parent material. The fluctuating concentrations in the fractions are the result of repeated excavations in the area where the profile is located and the repeated mixing of the parent material with an- thropogenic artefacts. Considering that profile PR1 has been un- der strong anthropogenic influence for over 2,000 years, it is likely that some of the metals were only weakly bound. In general, the distribution of metal concentration by frac- tion in the PR1 profile is as follows: RES > ORG > FEMN > CARB, except for Cu, which is ORG > RES > FEMN > CARB. In soil profile PR2, the largest fraction of metals is in the frac- tion RES (Fig. 9; Supplements 4a). The content of humus and ni- trogen is highest in the surface horizon, and the concentration of PTEs in the fraction ORG is also highest there. Chromium is not present in the FEMN fraction, while other metals are similarly present in the FEMN and ORG fractions. Only Pb and signifi- cantly less Zn, Cu and Ni are bound in the CARB fraction. The urban soil profile PR2 is characterised by an enrichment of all the studied PTEs in the surface layer. However, the two upper layers and part of the third layer were infilled in 2009 and have no fixed genetic relationship with the rest of the profile. It is likely that some of the material from the immediate vicinity of the profile was used to level the site and some was brought in from elsewhere. How- ever, one can observe an increase in metals bound to the FEMN fraction with increasing depth and a strong decrease in the deep- est layer, which is consistent with the amounts of Fe2O3 and MnO in the profile (Supplements 3; ŠORŠA, 2014). The distribution of fractions in profile PR2 is RES > FEMN > ORG > CARB. In soil profile PR3 PTEs Cr, Cu, Ni and Zn are mainly con- centrated in the RES fraction and Pb in the FEMN fraction or in Figure 9. The diagrams of percentage concentration of Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn in the CARB, FEMN, ORG and RES geochemical fractions in soil samples from horizons/ layers in urban and rural soil profiles determined with BCR SEP. G eologia C roatica Šorša et al.: Comparison of urban and rural soils based on speciation of heavy metals by BCR sequential extraction procedure ... 97 deeper horizons in ORG (Fig. 9; Supplements 4.a). Chromium, Cu, Ni and Zn are almost equally presented in the FEMN and ORG fractions. This is a consequence of the concentration of or- ganic matter and Fe and Mn oxides in the soil. The content of humus and nitrogen is relatively low, except in the two upper ho- rizons. The content of Fe2O3 and MnO is slightly increased in the whole profile compared to the other urban profiles PR1 and PR2 (Supplements 3; ŠORŠA, 2014). The lowest amount of PTEs is bound in the CARB fraction. The exception is Pb in the two deep- est horizons, where it is almost absent in the RES fraction, but evenly distributed in the other three. Zinc, Pb and Cu are enriched in the surface horizon, probably due to the proximity of the iron- works (Fig. 7; Tab. 4). In the deeper horizons, the metals are pre- dominantly of geogenic origin, with the exception of Pb, which is predominantly of anthropogenic origin throughout the profile. The dominant distribution of geochemical fractions in the PR3 profile is RES > FEMN > ORG > CARB, with the exception of Pb, which is FEMN > ORG > RES > CARB. The predominant distribution of the studied PTEs concen- tration by fraction in the urban soil profiles is as follows: RES > ORG or FEMN > CARB, except for Cu, where ORG > RES > FEMN > CARB. The leaching content of PTEs by the fractions shows a large variability due to the different chemical composition of the soil samples. The ranges of variation between the minimum and max- imum values are generally large, which is another indicator of the diversity of soil composition by horizon/layer. Lead shows large ranges for all fractions, Cu for the RES and ORG fractions, Ni and Zn for RES and FEMN. Chromium shows the lowest con- centration ranges in all fractions compared to the other PTEs, probably because it is predominantly of geogenic origin. Based on the geological background and the results of total concentra- tions of PTEs in soil and on BCR SEP it can be concluded that Ni is also partly of geogenic origin, while Cu and Zn are mainly of anthropogenic origin. The content and “behaviour” of Pb in all fractions differs from that of the other PTEs. Lead is almost uniformly present in the fractions RES, FEMN and ORG and varies irregularly in the profiles. Lead is predominantly of an- thropogenic origin. 3.2. Rural soils 3.2.1. Mineralogy Soil profiles PR4 and PR5 are located on agricultural land and anthropogenic influences are mainly limited to the surface hori- zons. The minerals identified in the horizons of the rural soil pro- files were quartz, phyllosilicates, calcite, dolomite and plagio- clase (Figs. 6 and Supplements 1; Supplements 2). Quartz is less abundant in PR4, but predominates in profile PR5. This change is followed by the change in phyllosilicate content. The amount of phyllosilicate in PR4 is the highest in the horizons with the lowest quartz content (at a depth of 90 - 115 cm). The content of phyllosilicates in PR5 increases with depth. Calcite and dolomite are present in profile PR4, but not in PR5. Plagioclase feldspars are present in both rural profiles. The rural soil profile PR4 is lo- cated on carbonate alluvium of the Sava River and its mineral- ogical composition is consistent with the parent material (Fig. 2a; Supplements 3; PIKIJA, 1987a, b; ŠORŠA et al., 2018). Hence, it has the highest dolomite content compared to the other profiles. The mineralogy of the second soil profile PR5 indicates that the parent material probably originates from the siliciclastic alluvium of the River Kupa (Fig. 2a, PIKIJA, 1987a, b; ŠORŠA et al., 2018). 3.2.2. Total concentration of the selected PTEs The surface horizon of profile PR4 is slightly enriched in metals compared to the lower horizons (Fig. 7; Supplements 4b). Sub- sequently, the content of metals increases strongly in the pseu- dogley horizon PR4- II /C (58-90 cm) and relict gley horizon PR4- III /C/G (90-115 cm) (Figs. 5 and 7; Tab. 4). The concentration of all PTEs then gradually decreases in the two deepest horizons. The highest concentrations of all PTEs in the entire PR4 profile were measured in the relict gley horizon. The origin of the met- als in the profile, especially their high content in this horizon, is questionable. The high content of metals accumulated in the rel- ict gley horizon corresponds to the siliciclastic parent material of the floodplain of the River Kupa, although the PR4 profile was excavated in the carbonate floodplain of the River Sava (Fig. 2a, PIKIJA 1987a, b; ŠORŠA, 2014). The reason for this could be the high groundwater table in this area and the frequent floods, which lead to a mixing of water and drained material from both rivers. Additionally, the mouth of the River Kupa shifted downstream over time and was once located 1 km further north than today (SLUKAN ALTIĆ, 2004). The concentration and distribution of PTEs in the PR4 soil profile was influenced by several factors/processes: the carbon- ate parent material, then the pedogenic processes with a high groundwater table leading to the development of gley soils, fre- quent flooding and siliciclastic material brought by the River Kupa, and intensive agricultural production. Only three horizons (Fig. 5) were developed in the drilled soil profile PR5, which is located in the north of the study area, on agricultural land that developed on the siliciclastic alluvium of the River Kupa (Fig. 2 a,b,c). The concentrations of selected PTEs are low. The geochemical maps show a similar distribution of elements in the vicinity of the profile site (ŠORŠA & HALAMIĆ, 2014). The concentration of Cu, Zn, Ni, increases with depth, while Pb and Cr decrease (Fig. 7). The proportion of geogenic elements increases with depth, while elements of partial or complete anthropogenic origin decrease. 3.2.3. BCR Sequential extraction procedure of the selected PTEs The predominant fraction for Cr, Cu, Ni and Zn in the rural soil profile PR4 is RES, with the exception of Pb, which prevails in the FEMN or ORG fractions (Fig. 9; Supplements 4.b). The sec- ond most important fraction is the FEMN, except for Cr and par- tially Cu, which is the most important for Pb and the smallest for Zn. The concentration of bound metals in ORG fraction is slightly lower than that of FEMN. The distribution of the fractions by depth is variable. The concentration of all measured metals in- creased in the gley horizons in the ORG and FEMN fractions and decreased in the RES fraction. It is likely that the metals were increasingly dissolved out of the residual minerals. Mobilised metals are bound to organic material, clays, and Fe-Mn oxides due to changes in reduction and oxidation conditions in this ho- rizon. Lead and Zn are not present (except in the surface horizon), and very few other metals are present in the CARB fraction. Gene rally, the distribution in profile PR4 is RES > FEMN > ORG > CARB except for Pb, which is FEMN > RES > ORG > CARB. In rural soil profile PR5, the dominant fraction of metals is RES, with the exception of Pb (Fig. 9; Supplements 4.b). Lead is distributed among the fractions RES, FEMN, ORG and CARB depending on the horizons. The concentration of Cu, Ni and Zn in the FEMN fraction is higher than in the ORG fraction, which is related to the affinity of each metal and the content of clay, or- ganic matter and Fe- Mn-oxy-hydroxides (Supplements 1 and 3). G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 76/298 Chromium is preferentially bound in the ORG fraction, Cu and Ni in the FEMN fraction, Zn equally in both (McGRATH, 1997; ETTLER et al., 2005; ŠORŠA, 2014; KHADHAR et al., 2020). The concentration of metals in the RES fraction increases with depth, except for Pb, while it decreases in the fractions FEMN and ORG, except for Cr and Ni. The metal content in the CARB fraction is generally very low. The high content of Pb and partly of other PTEs in the CARB fraction in the surface horizon is probably brought in with the dust and adsorbed to soil particles (TESSIER et al., 1979). The distribution of PTEs in profile PR5 is RES > FEMN > ORG > CARB except for Pb, which is RES > ORG > FEMN > CARB. The predominant distribution of metal concentration by frac- tion in the rural geochemical profiles is as follows: RES > ORG or FEMN > CARB, except for Pb which is FEMN > RES or ORG > CARB. The large variability of Pb and partly also of Cu, Ni and Zn in the fractions in rural soil profiles is due to their anthropogenic or partly anthropogenic origin. Rural soil profiles were developed in rural area and therefore the anthropogenic influences were mostly limited to the surface horizons. The parent material and pedogenic development had a dominant influence on the distri- bution of PTEs in the horizons, except for Pb. 3.3. Risk assessment 3.3.1. Risk Assessment Code The environmental risk of the selected PTEs was assessed based on the concentration of PTEs in the CARB fraction (RATH et al., 2009; LIU et al., 2010). The risk of PTEs in soil profiles varied ac- cording to the depth and each PTE (Tab. 5). The risk assessment by RAC in the profiles ranges from no risk to high risk. The RAC is highest in urban soil profiles PR1 and PR2, followed by rural profile PR5, and profiles PR3 and PR4 have almost the same RAC. In the urban soil profiles, there is no risk for Cr and Ni in most horizons/layers, and the risk for Cu and Zn is low. The RACs for Pb range from no risk in the middle horizons in profile PR3, to low risk (from 1 to 10) in the entire urban soil profile PR1, the upper and two lower layers in PR2, and the upper horizon in PR3. A medium risk (from 11 to 30) exists in the middle layers of profile PR2 and in the two lowest horizons of PR3. There is no risk for Pb in most horizons of rural soil profiles PR4 and PR5, but only in the upper horizon of profile PR5 is there a high risk of Pb mobilisation (from 31 to 50). There is a low risk for Cr, Cu and partially for Ni. There is a low risk of release of Zn from the CARB fraction to the environment in the upper ho- rizons of PR4 and PR5. According to the calculated RAC, the risk of mobilisation of metals to the environment in urban soil profiles is in the follow- ing order: Pb > Zn > Cu > Ni > Cr, considering the magnitude of the risk. The risk of mobilisation of PTEs in rural soil profiles varies as follows: Cr > Cu > Ni > Zn > Pb. 3.3.2 Risk assessment based on the sum of concentrations in the fractions CARB, FEMN and ORG In the urban area, based on the official land use in the city of Si- sak (KAMINSKI-KIRŠ, 2002), the urban soil profiles PR1, PR2 Table 5. The percentage of the metals Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn in the CARB fraction in soil profiles and assessment of the risk of release of PTEs into the environment (RAC). Type Soil profile CARB Cr CARB Cu CARB Ni CARB Pb CARB Zn *EM (%) = CARBM / (CARBM + FEMNM + ORGM + RESM) x 100 U rb an so il pr ofi le PR1-A (0-12 cm) 0.20 0.73 0.00 12.92 6.67 PR1-I (12-29 cm) 0.20 0.99 0.00 2.73 6.64 PR1-II (29-50 cm) 0.20 1.05 0.00 2.44 6.35 PR1-III (50-70 cm) 0.20 1.01 0.00 2.39 5.77 PR1-IV (70-100 cm) 0.20 2.23 8.54 2.22 7.58 PR1-V (100-120 cm) 0.20 2.21 8.38 2.14 8.02 PR2-I (0-15 cm) 0.11 1.74 0.00 6.40 9.02 PR2-II (15-33 cm) 0.28 2.65 0.00 212.9 6.30 PR2-III (33-60 cm) 0.26 2.94 4.14 16.9 2.10 PR2-IV (60-88 cm) 0.13 4.54 5.95 6.61 2.70 PR2-V (88-120 cm) 0.16 1.20 0.00 8.70 0.67 PR3-A (0-14 cm) 0.78 1.24 0.43 1.40 5.52 PR3-I (14-28 cm) 1.15 1.64 0.06 0.11 3.64 PR3-II (28-67 cm) 1.54 4.55 0.05 0.19 0.00 PR3-CG (67-130 cm) 2.29 5.51 0.06 0.31 0.01 PR3-Cg (Gr) (130-160 cm) 0.56 3.48 0.08 28.9 0.01 PR3-Cg (160-200 cm) 0.92 2.40 3.66 30.0 0.01 Ru ra l s oi l p ro fil e PR4-P (0-32 cm) 4.53 3.09 6.25 0.19 5.54 PR4-I/C (32-58 cm) 4.90 4.52 0.06 0.17 0.01 PR4-II/C (58-90 cm) 3.65 2.83 2.75 0.14 0.00 PR4-III/C/G (90-115 cm) 4.08 0.00 1.55 0.15 0.00 PR4-IV/C/G (115-160 cm) 7.96 4.34 1.47 0.15 0.01 PR4-V/C/G (160-200 cm) 6.05 4.84 0.05 0.16 0.01 PR5-P (0-30 cm) 3.79 3.16 3.64 344.8 2.53 PR5-G (30-80 cm) 5.58 3.20 3.33 0.27 0.93 PR5-G (80-120 cm) 4.21 3.26 1.47 0.17 0.00 * The percentage of metal M extraction in the CARB fraction; M = Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, Zn. 1 bold numbers – low risk; 2red coloured numbers – medium risk; 3yellow highlighted numbers – high risk G eologia C roatica Šorša et al.: Comparison of urban and rural soils based on speciation of heavy metals by BCR sequential extraction procedure ... 99 and PR3 are located in the parks and recreational areas. The pre- scribed limits for these land use for Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn are 500, 300, 200, 500 and 700 mg/kg dry soil, respectively (MESIĆ et al., 2008). In the rural area of Sisak, the rural soil profiles PR4 and PR5 correspond to the official land use in areas with soils for agricultural production (KAMINSKI-KIRŠ, 2002). MESIĆ et al. (2008) set limits for Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn of 100, 60, 50, 100 and 200 mg/kg dry soil, respectively, for soils for agricultural pro- duction. The total concentrations determined with AAS (Tab. 4) were below the limits for the corresponding land use in all horizons/ layers of both urban and rural soil profiles. Consequently, the sum of the concentration of CARB, FEMN and ORG is lower than the total concentration of the element (Tab. 4 and Supplements 4.a, b). The risk ratio for all selected PTEs in urban and rural soil profiles is RR ≤ 0. There is no risk of contamination in all soil profiles. The estimated risks for the release of PTEs to the environ- ment and the risk to the environment and human health are neg- ligible or very low. The soils in the soil profiles are neutral to slightly alkaline, they have a large buffering capacity, a high con- tent of carbonates, humus and nitrogen (ŠORŠA, 2014), so the risk of PTE mobilisation and the impact on human health are low. 4. CONCLUSION 4.1. Urban soils (a) The soil in the urban soil profiles PR1, PR2 and PR3 has mostly no developed horizons, only slightly different soil layers have formed. The pedogenesis of the whole profile PR1 and the upper layers of profiles PR2 and PR3 has been mainly influenced by human activities from ancient times until today, while the in- fluence of the parent material on the soil properties is minor. (b) The mineralogical composition in soil profiles PR1 and PR2 is consistent with the mineralogical composition of the si- liciclastic alluvium of the Rivers Kupa and Odra. The mineralogy of profile PR3 corresponds to the mineralogical composition of loess. The urban profile PR1 was under strong anthropogenic in- fluence throughout its depth, while the profiles PR2 and PR3 show anthropogenic influences in their mineralogical composi- tion in their upper part. The lower part of profiles PR2 and PR3 is natural. (c) The concentration of the PTEs Cr and Ni is similar in all soil profiles, but the concentration of Cu, Pb and Zn is higher in the urban soil profiles than in the rural profiles. The distribution of metals along the horizons/layers in the urban profiles PR1 and the upper parts PR2 and PR3 is irregular and strongly influenced by humans’ excavation and contamination. (d) The general distribution of PTEs concentration by frac- tion, determined by BCR SEP in urban soil profiles, is as follows: RES > ORG or FEMN > CARB, except for Cu where ORG > RES > FEMN > CARB. Based on the geological background, pedogenesis, anthropogenic influences and the results of the anal- yses of BCR SEP, it can be concluded that the source of Cr is pre- dominantly geogenic and that of Ni is partly geogenic and partly anthropogenic. Copper and Zn are mainly anthropogenic and to a lesser extent geogenic in origin. Lead was accumulated in the soil predominantly by anthropogenic input. 4.2. Rural soils (a) The soil in rural soil profiles PR4 and PR5 has developed soil horizons. In addition to the parent material, groundwater and sur- face water had a significant influence on the pedogenic develop- ment of the soil in profile PR4. The rural soil profile PR5 shows natural pedogenesis. (b) The mineralogical composition in soil profiles PR4 and PR5 is consistent with the mineralogical composition of the car- bonate alluvium of the River Sava and the siliciclastic alluvium of the Rivers Kupa and Odra, respectively. The rural soil profiles PR4 and PR5 are located on agricultural land and the anthro- pogenic influences are mainly limited to the surface horizons/ layers. (c) The concentration of PTEs Cr and Ni is similar in all stud- ied soil profiles, but the concentration of Cu, Pb and Zn is lower in the rural soil profiles than in the urban profiles. Pedogenesis in rural soil profile PR4 was shaped by the high groundwater level and the distribution of metals in the horizons was influenced by frequent flooding. Profile PR5 shows natural pedogenesis and was influenced by humans only in the surface horizon. (d) Distribution by geochemical fraction, determined using BCR SEP in rural soil profiles, is RES > FEMN or ORG > CARB, except for Pb where FEMN > RES or ORG > CARB. Based on the parent material, pedogenic development, limited anthropo- genic influences and the results of the analyses of BCR SEP, it can be concluded that the parent material and pedogenic devel- opment had a predominant influence on the distribution of geo- chemical fractions in the horizons, except for Pb. 4.3. Urban vs. rural soil profiles Soil horizons were undeveloped or weakly developed in the ur- ban soils, in contrast to the developed horizons in the rural soil profiles. The differences in the mineralogical composition of the urban and rural soil profiles are primarily due to the fact that the parent material in the urban soil profiles was more anthropogeni- cally influenced. The geological background has the greatest in- fluence on the similar concentration of Cr and Ni in urban and rural soil profiles, but the concentration of Cu, Pb and Zn was significantly higher in urban soil profiles than in rural ones, due to historical land use and repeated excavation and contamination. The distribution by geochemical fraction for Cr, Ni and Zn was similar in all profiles. The distribution of fractions for Cu in ur- ban soil profiles and for Pb in rural soil profiles was predomi- nantly anthropogenically influenced. 4.4. Risk assessment (a) According to the calculated RAC of the studied PTEs in ur- ban soil profiles, the magnitude of risk is in the following order: Pb > Zn > Cu > Ni > Cr. The risk of mobilisation of PTEs in ru- ral soil profiles varies as follows: Cr > Cu > Ni > Zn > Pb. The high risk is recorded only in one surface horizon of one rural profile. (b) The results of the total concentration of selected PTEs determined by AAS were below the limits for the corresponding land use in all horizons/layers of both urban and rural soil pro- files. Consequently, the sum of the concentration of CARB, FEMN and ORG is below the prescribed limits. The calculated risk ratio for all studied PTEs in urban and rural soil profiles is RR ≤ 0. There is no risk of metal release in any soil profile. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This study was supported by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports, Republic of Croatia - Scientific Project: The Basic Geochemical Map of Croatia, (No. 181-1811096-1181). We thank G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 76/2100 the associated editor Zoran PEH, reviewer Darko TIBLJAŠ an Anonymous Reviewer for their thorough review, which signifi- cantly improved the manuscript. REFERENCES CRAUL, J.P. (1992): Urban soil in landscape design.– J. Wiley and Sons, New York, 416 p. DAVIDSON, C.M., THOMAS, R.P., McVEY, S.E., PERALA, R., LITTLEJOHN, D. & URE, A.M. (1994): Evaluation of a sequential extraction procedure for the specia- tion of heavy metals in sediments.– Anal. Chim. Acta, 291, 277–286. doi: 10.1016/0003-2670(94)80023-5 ETTLER, V., VANĚK, A., MIHALJEVIČ, M. & BEZDIČKA, P. (2005): Contrasting lead speciation in forest and tilled soils heavily polluted by lead metallurgy.– Chemos- phere, 58, 1449–1459. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.09.084 EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2001): Report 19775 EN of the European Commission: The certification of the extractable contents (mass fractions) of Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn in freshwater sediment following a sequential extraction procedure BCR- 701.– Competitive and Sustainable Growth. GLEYZES, CH., TELLIER, S. & ASTRUC, M. (2002): Fractionation studies of trace elements in contaminated soils and sediments: a review of sequential extraction procedures.– Trends in analytical chemistry, 21, No. 6 + 7, 451–467. doi: 10.1016/ S0165-9936(02)00603-9 GREINERT, A. (2015): The heterogeneity of urban soils in the light of their properties.– J. Soils Sediments, 15/8, 1725–1737. doi: 10.1007/s11368-014-1054-6. GREINERT, A. & KOSTECKI, J. (2019): Anthropogenic Materials as Bedrock of Urban Technosols.– In: VASENEV, V., DOVLETYAROVA, E., CHENG, Z., PROKOF’EVA, T., MOREL, J. & ANANYEVA, N. (eds.): Urbanization: Chal- lenge and Opportunity for Soil Functions and Ecosystem Services. Proceedings of the 9th SUITMA 2017. Springer Geography, 11–20. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-89602- 1_3. KAMINSKI-KIRŠ, N. (2002): Generalni urbanistički plan grada Siska - I dio [General urban plan of the city of Sisak – Part I – in Croatian].– CPA Centar za prostorno uređenje i arhitekturu d.o.o. Zagreb, 73 p. HOOKER, P.J. & NATHANAIL, C.P. (2006): Risk-based characterisation of lead in ur- ban soils.– Chem. Geol., 226, 340–351. doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2005.09.028 HUSNJAK, S. (2012): Kompilirana pedološka karta grada Siska i okolice [Compiled pedological map of the city of Sisak and its surroundings – in Croatian].– Unpubl. report, Archive of the Croatian Geological Survey, Zagreb. HUSNJAK, S. (2014): Sistematika tla Hrvatske [Soil systematics of Croatia – in Croa- tian].– Hrvatska sveučilišna naklada, Zagreb, 375 p. HUSNJAK, S., RUBINIĆ, V., HALAMIĆ, J., ŠORŠA, A. & VRBEK, B. (2018): Chara- cteristics and classification of three urban soils in the Sisak city, Croatia.– Agricul- turae Conspectus Scientificus, 83/3, 231–238. IUSS Working Group WRB (2014): World reference base for soil resources 2014.– World Soil Resources Reports, No. 106, FAO, Rome. KHADHAR, S., SDIRI, A., CHEKIRBEN, A., AZOUZI, R. & CHAREF, A. (2020): In- tegration of sequential extraction, chemical analysis and statistical tools for the availability risk assessment of heavy metals in sludge amended soils.– Environ. Pollut, 263. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114543. LEHMANN, A. & STAHR, K. (2007): Nature and significance of anthropogenic urban soils.– J. Soils Sediments, 7, 247–260. doi: 10.1065/jss2007.06.235 LISAC, I. & HERIĆ-NEKIĆ, S. (1995): Contribution to the knowledge of the climate of Sisak.– Croatian Meteorological Journal, 30, 79–99. LIU, J., CHEN, Y., WANG, J., QI, J. WANG, C., LIPPOLD, H. & LIPPMANN-PIPKE, J. (2010): Factor analysis and sequential extraction unveil geochemical processes relevant for trace metal distributions in fluvial sediments of a pyrite mining area, China.– Carbonates and Evaporites, 25, 51–63. doi: 10.1007/s13146-010-0007-4 McGRATH, S.P. (1997): Chromium and Nickel.– In: ALLOWAY, B.J. (ed.): Heavy Me- tals in Soils.– Blackie Academic and Professional, London, 368 p. MESIĆ, H., ČIDIĆ, A., DOMINIKOVIĆ ALAVANJA, S., KISIĆ, I., BAŠIĆ, F., ZGOR- ELEC, Ž., HUSNJAK, S., ROMIĆ, D., KOMESAROVIĆ, B., KLAIĆ, D., PER- NAR, N., BAKŠIĆ, D., VRBEK, B., PILAŠ, I., POTOČIĆ, N., SELETKOVIĆ, I., DURN, G., MILEUSNIĆ, M., NAKIĆ, Z. & MIKO, S. (2008): Izrada programa trajnog motrenja tala Hrvatske s pilot projektom LIFE05 TCY/CRO 000105.– In: KUČAR DRAGIČEVIĆ, S. (ed.): Program trajnog motrenja tala Hrvatske [in Cro- atian], Croatian Environmental Agency, Zagreb, 131 p. MIKO, S., DURN, G., ADAMCOVÀ, R., ČOVIĆ, M., DUBIKOVÀ, M., SKALSKÝ, R., KAPELJ, S. & OTTNER, F. (2003): Heavy metal distribution in karst soil from Croatia and Slovakia.– Environmental Geology, 45, 262–272. doi: 10.1007/s00254- 003-0878-y MOORE D.M. & REYNOLDS R.C. JR. (1997): X-ray diffraction and the identification and analysis of clay Minerals.– Oxford University Press, Oxford, 378 p. NIEUWENHUIZE, J., POLEY-VOS, C.H., VAN DER AKKER, A.H. & VAN DELFT, W. (1991): Comparison of microwave and conventional extraction techniques for the determination of metals in soils, sediments and sludge samples by atomic spec- trometry.– Analyst, 116, 347–351. doi: 10.1039/an9911600347 O’RIORDAN, R., DAVIES, J., STEVENS, C., QUINTON, J.N. & BOYKO, CH. (2021): The ecosystem services of urban soils: A review.– Geoderma 395, 115076. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2021.115076. PIKIJA, M. (1987a): Osnovna geološka karta SFRJ 1:100 000, list Sisak [Basic Geolog- ical Map of the SFRJ 1:100,000, Sisak sheet – in Croatian].– Geol. Zavod Zagreb, Savezni geol. Zavod, Beograd. PIKIJA, M. (1987b): Osnovna geološka karta SFRJ 1:100 000. Tumač za list Sisak [Basic Geological Map of the SFRJ 1:100,000, Explantory notes for Sisak sheet – in Cro- atian with English summary].– Geol. Zavod Zagreb, Savezni geol. Zavod, Beograd, 55 p. POUYAT, R.V., SZLAVECZ, K., YESILONIS, I.D., GROFFMAN, P.M. & SCHWARZ, K. (2010): Chemical, Physical and Biological Characteristics of Urban Soils.– In: AITKENHEAD-PETERSON, J. & VOLDER, A. (eds.): Agronomy Monograph 55, Urban Ecosystem Ecology. American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science So- ciety of America, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, USA, 119–155. doi: 10.2134/agronmonogr55.c7 PUEYO, M., RAURET, G., LÜCK, A.D., YLI-HALLA, B.M., MUNTAU, C.H., QUEVAUVILLERE, D.PH. & LÓPEZ-SÁNCHEZ, J.F. (2001): Certification of the extractable contents of Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn in a freshwater sediment fol- lowing a collaboratively tested and optimised three-step sequential extraction pro- cedure.– J. Environ. Monit., 243–250. doi: 10.1039/b010235k. RAPANAT, S., SALMINEN, R., TARVAINEN, T., KRČMOVÀ, K. & CVEČKOVÀ (2008): Application of a risk assessment method to Europe-wide geochemical base- line data.– Geochemistry: Exploration, Environment, Analysis, 8, 291–299. Doi: 10.1144/1467-7873/08-176 RATH, P., PANDA, U.C., BHATTA, D. & SAHU, K.C. (2009): Use of sequential leach- ing, mineralogy, morphology, and multivariate statistical technique for quantifying metal pollution in highly polluted aquatic sediments – A case study: Brahmani and Nandira Rivers, India.– Journal of Hazardous Materials, 163, 632–644. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.048 REIMANN, C., FILZMOSER, P., GARRET, R.G. & DUTTER, R. (2008): Statistical Data Analysis Explained.– John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. SCHULTZ, L.G. (1964): Quantitative interpretation of mineralogical composition from X-ray and chemical data for the Pierre Shale.– U.S. Geological Survey Proffesion- al Paper 391-C, 31 p. SLUKAN ALTIĆ, M. (2004): Povijesni atlas gradova: Sisak [Historical – Towns’ Atlas: Sisak – in Croatian].– Sisak State Archives & Croatian State Archives, Zagreb, 241 p. SOBOCKÁ, J. (2003): Urban soils vs. anthropogenic soils, their differentiation and clas- sification.– Final Program and Abstracts Book, SUITMA Int. Conf., July, 9–11. 2003, Nancy, France, 41–42. ŠORŠA, A. (2014): Urban geochemistry of the potentially toxic elements in the soils of the Sisak city and its surroundings.– Unpubl. PhD Thesis, Faculty of Mining, Ge- ology and Petroleum Engineering, University of Zagreb, 308 p. ŠORŠA, A. & HALAMIĆ, J. (2014): Geochemical Atlas of Sisak.– Public Library Vlado Gotovac Sisak, City Museum Sisak and Croatian Geological Survey, Sisak-Zagreb, 200 p. ŠORŠA, A., DURN, G., HALAMIĆ, J., HUSNJAK, S., GARAŠIĆ, V. & MILEUSNIĆ, M. (2017): Urban geochemistry: Sisak in Croatia, a long-lasting historical, urban and industrial city.– Geochemistry: Exploration, Environment, Analysis, 17/2, 159–163. doi: 10.1144/geochem2015-395. ŠORŠA, A., PEH, Z. & HALAMIĆ, J. (2018): Geochemical mapping the urban and industrial legacy of Sisak, Croatia, using discriminant function analysis of topsoil chemical data.– Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 187, 155–167. doi: 10.1016/j. gexplo.2017.07.014. STARKEY H.C., BLACKMON P.D. & HAUFF P.L. (1984): The Routine Mineralogical Analysis of Clay-Bearing Samples. – U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1563, 31 p. TESSIER, A., CAMPBELL, P.G.C. & BISSON, M. (1979): Sequential Extraction Pro- cedure for the Speciation of Particulate Trace Metals.– Analytical Chemistry, 51/7, 844–851. doi: 10.1021/ac50043a017 URE, A.M., QUEVAUVILLER, P.H., MUNTAU, H. & GRIEPNIK, B. (1993): Specia- tion of heavy metals in soils and sediments. An account of the improvement and harmonization of extraction techniques undertaken under the auspices of the BCR of the commission of the European communities.– International Journal of Envi- ronmental Analytical Chemistry, 51, 135–151. doi: 10.1080/03067319308027619 ZIMMERMAN, A.J. & WEINDORF, D.C. (2010): Heavy Metal and Trace Metal Analy- sis in Soil by Sequential Extraction: A Review of Procedures.– Hindawi Publishing Corporation, International Journal of Analytical Chemistry, 387803. doi: 10.1155/2010/387803 G eologia C roatica Šorša et al.: Comparison of urban and rural soils based on speciation of heavy metals by BCR sequential extraction procedure ... 101 Supplement 1. Mineral composition of soil from urban and rural soil profiles PR1, PR2, PR3, PR4 and PR5 determined by X-ray diffraction. Type of soil profiles Soil samples from soil horizons/layers Qtz Phil Cal Dol PI Cri wt. % U rb an so il pr ofi le s PR1-A (0-12 cm) 46 32 11 7 4 - PR1-I (12-29 cm) 48 30 9 9 4 - PR1-ll (29-50 cm) 56 26 11 4 3 - PR1-III (50-70 cm) 49 31 11 4 4 - PR1-IV (70-100 cm) 57 27 10 3 3 - PR1-V (100-120 cm) 58 29 8 3 2 - PR2-I (0-15 cm) 47 27 9 14 3 - PR2-II (15-33 cm) 45 17 20 14 4 - PR2-III (33-60 cm) 38 31 8 20 3 - PR2-IV (60-88 cm) 40 42 4 10 4 - PR2-V (88-120 cm) 37 47 3 10 3 - PR3-A (0-14 cm) 59 32 - - 5 4 PR3-I (14-28 cm) 55 37 - - 4 4 PR3-II (28-67 cm) 53 35 - - 7 5 PR3-CG (67-130 cm) 52 39 - - 5 4 PR3-Cg (Gr) (130-160 cm) 47 44 - - 6 3 PR3-Cg (160-200 cm) 52 40 - - 5 3 Ru ra l s oi l p ro fil es PR4-P (0-32 cm) 42 27 4 23 4 - PR4-I/C (32-58 cm) 35 27 9 26 3 - PR4-II/C (58-90 cm) 33 42 6 17 2 - PR4-III/C/G (90-115 cm) 33 45 - 19 4 - PR4-IV/C/G (115-160 cm) 36 28 11 21 4 - PR4-V/C/G (160-200 cm) 39 27 9 23 2 - PR5-P (0-30 cm) 71 26 - - 3 - PR5-G (30-70 cm) 64 32 - - 4 - PR5-G (70-130 cm) 60 36 - - 4 - Abbreviations: Qtz, quartz; Phil, phyllosilicates; Cal, calcite; Dol, dolomite, Pl, plagioclase and Cri, cristobalite. Supplement 2. X-ray diffraction patterns of selected representative soil samples: PR1-II (29-30 cm), PR2-III (33-60 cm), PR3-II (28-67 cm), PR4-P (0-32 cm) and PR5- G (30-80 cm). Abbreviations for minerals are the same as in Supplement 1. G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 76/2102 Supplements 3. The concentration (in wt. %) of major elements oxides and Ba in soil samples from soil profiles PR1, PR2, PR3, PR4 and PR5. SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO MgO Na2O K2O MnO TiO2 P2O5 Cr2O3 Ba *LOI SUM Soil profile / Detection limit 0.1 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.001 0.01 0.1 0.01 U rb an so il pr ofi le s PR1-A (0-12 cm) 58.2 8.89 3.64 6.17 1.95 0.79 1.45 0.09 0.62 0.70 0.012 0.03 16.5 99.0 PR1-I (12-29 cm) 58.4 8.35 3.52 7.28 1.95 0.75 1.39 0.10 0.57 0.81 0.017 0.03 15.8 99.0 PR1-II (29-50 cm) 60.4 7.92 3.36 7.04 1.46 0.72 1.31 0.10 0.48 1.04 0.012 0.03 15.6 99.5 PR1-III (50-70 cm) 62.0 7.87 3.28 6.81 1.30 0.74 1.32 0.10 0.52 1.07 0.011 0.03 14.5 99.5 PR1-IV (70-100 cm) 61.5 7.92 3.21 6.34 1.17 0.70 1.33 0.09 0.59 1.07 0.010 0.02 14.9 98.3 PR1-V (100-120 cm) 62.0 7.75 3.25 6.81 1.27 0.71 1.34 0.10 0.48 1.07 0.013 0.03 14.8 98.9 PR2-I (0-15 cm) 49.8 9.47 3.84 10.1 3.60 0.89 1.49 0.10 0.60 0.24 0.013 0.03 19.7 99.5 PR2-II (15-33 cm) 51.8 7.05 2.80 13.5 3.82 0.96 1.17 0.07 0.45 0.12 0.007 0.02 17.6 99.3 PR2-III (33-60 cm) 47.2 9.99 3.72 11.3 5.34 0.83 1.59 0.08 0.66 0.11 0.015 0.03 18.5 99.4 PR2-IV (60-88 cm) 54.6 14.7 5.45 3.80 2.54 0.87 2.19 0.11 0.95 0.19 0.018 0.04 13.0 98.4 PR2-V (88-120 cm) 53.8 14.8 5.66 4.08 2.90 0.83 2.23 0.12 0.86 0.19 0.019 0.04 13.7 99.3 PR3-A (0-14 cm) 62.8 13.7 5.39 1.14 1.43 1.23 2.08 0.13 1.08 0.16 0.014 0.05 9.92 99.1 PR3-I (14-28 cm) 63.7 14.6 5.76 0.97 1.44 1.29 2.19 0.11 1.13 0.15 0.012 0.06 7.88 99.3 PR3-II (28-67 cm) 64.2 15.1 5.73 0.72 1.56 1.33 2.34 0.10 1.18 0.15 0.015 0.05 6.90 99.3 PR3-CG (67-130 cm) 63.4 15.8 5.70 0.63 1.56 1.38 2.39 0.08 1.16 0.11 0.024 0.05 6.92 99.2 PR3-Cg (Gr) (130-160 cm) 62.5 17.6 4.44 0.50 1.10 0.94 2.18 0.03 1.20 0.03 0.018 0.05 8.55 99.1 PR3-Cg (160-200 cm) 60.3 17.4 5.78 0.56 1.29 0.98 2.29 0.03 1.07 0.05 0.025 0.05 9.16 98.9 Ru ra l s oi l p ro fil es PR4-P (0-32 cm) 48.5 9.37 3.49 10.2 5.34 0.83 1.65 0.08 0.62 0.20 0.010 0.03 18.9 99.2 PR4-I/C (32-58 cm) 44.5 10.6 3.93 11.9 5.57 0.82 1.74 0.09 0.65 0.11 0.014 0.03 19.4 99.4 PR4-II/C (58-90 cm) 45.8 14.8 5.44 7.29 4.70 0.74 2.35 0.05 0.75 0.14 0.017 0.04 17.4 99.5 PR4-III/C/G (90-115 cm) 52.6 17.5 7.12 1.78 2.12 0.78 2.51 0.15 0.89 0.16 0.021 0.05 13.5 99.2 PR4-IV/C/G (115-160 cm) 42.5 11.2 4.32 12.4 5.56 0.77 1.77 0.12 0.69 0.11 0.013 0.03 20.1 99.5 PR4-V/C/G (160-200 cm) 44.5 9.32 3.48 13.0 6.10 0.80 1.52 0.08 0.63 0.10 0.013 0.03 19.9 99.5 PR5-P (0-30 cm) 67.6 13.1 4.69 0.52 1.07 1.03 2.21 0.12 0.97 0.16 0.016 0.04 7.72 99.2 PR5-G (30-70 cm) 66.6 13.9 5.15 0.52 1.17 1.01 2.34 0.11 0.95 0.12 0.015 0.04 7.20 99.1 PR5-G (70-130 cm) 64.5 15.0 5.97 0.46 1.29 0.97 2.52 0.09 0.90 0.11 0.015 0.04 7.08 98.9 * LOI – Loss on ignition G eologia C roatica Šorša et al.: Comparison of urban and rural soils based on speciation of heavy metals by BCR sequential extraction procedure ... 103 Supplements 4a. The concentration in (mg/kg) of Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn as PTEs in geochemical fractions, obtained with BCR SEP, of soil samples from urban soil profiles PR1, PR2 and PR3. Soil profile PR1 Chromium (mg/kg) Cupper (mg/kg) Nickel (mg/kg) Lead (mg/kg) Zinc (mg/kg) CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES PR1-A (0-12cm) *< DL < DL 4.08 14.2 0.71 1.70 51.5 44.0 0.00 2.75 7.80 30.0 4.20 17.4 28.1 94.2 9.44 25.5 29.2 77.4 PR1-I (12-29cm) < DL < DL 3.70 14.4 1.24 2.93 71.5 49.3 0.00 3.95 7.16 29.4 4.82 17.8 18.0 136 9.79 27.1 28.7 81.7 PR1-II (29-50cm) < DL < DL 3.79 13.8 1.53 3.54 87.7 53.6 0.00 3.91 8.41 28.4 4.79 13.6 21.6 156 10.1 31.4 35.8 82.0 PR1-III (50-70cm) < DL < DL 3.74 14.2 1.44 4.50 82.0 54.2 0.00 3.30 7.43 26.8 5.00 26.7 23.8 154 8.55 33.4 28.1 78.0 PR1-IV (70-100cm) < DL < DL 6.20 11.3 3.28 12.4 77.2 54.6 3.58 16.7 9.00 12.7 5.02 81.5 68.1 71.4 11.4 58.4 21.0 59.0 PR1-V (100-120cm) < DL < DL 5.64 11.9 3.46 12.9 80.8 59.6 3.56 16.2 8.82 13.9 5.03 68.9 71.5 89.1 12.6 59.3 24.1 61.1 Soil profile PR2 Chromium (mg/kg) Cupper (mg/kg) Nickel (mg/kg) Lead (mg/kg) Zinc (mg/kg) CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES PR2-I (0-15cm) < DL < DL 14.4 18.1 0.91 1.22 20.5 29.6 0.00 4.10 8.19 33.9 5.65 10.7 24.2 47.7 17.8 34.6 45.5 98.9 PR2-II (15-33cm) < DL < DL < DL 12.6 0.95 1.27 10.3 23.4 0.00 1.92 4.72 26.1 6.12 6.55 10.8 24.1 4.96 7.7 14.8 51.4 PR2-III (33-60cm) < DL < DL < DL 13.6 0.96 3.71 6.4 21.6 1.85 13.3 6.12 23.4 5.90 5.83 9.08 14.1 1.48 10.3 7.1 51.6 PR2-IV (60-88cm) < DL < DL 6.98 20.2 2.07 7.31 5.29 30.9 3.70 22.0 10.3 26.2 4.27 30.6 11.0 18.7 2.84 20.4 13.0 68.7 PR2-V (88-120cm) < DL < DL < DL 22.0 0.56 2.63 5.43 37.9 0.00 10.3 6.37 42.4 4.06 6.78 8.99 26.9 0.67 5.8 7.3 86.7 Soil profile PR3 Chromium (mg/kg) Cupper (mg/kg) Nickel (mg/kg) Lead (mg/kg) Zinc (mg/kg) CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES PR3-A (0-14cm) 0.20 0.57 5.19 19.5 0.32 4.18 3.71 17.5 0.10 2.94 2.86 17.4 0.60 21.6 8.50 12.1 7.65 23.8 23.8 83.5 PR3-I (14-28cm) 0.30 0.80 4.61 20.4 0.35 3.65 1.71 15.7 < DL 3.16 2.38 17.8 < DL 16.5 6.00 9.60 3.25 10.3 11.7 64.0 PR3-II (28-67cm) 0.45 1.63 3.76 23.4 1.01 3.19 1.19 16.8 < DL 3.38 2.57 21.2 < DL 8.87 4.25 5.88 < DL 3.05 3.85 57.1 PR3-CG (67-130cm) 0.69 2.08 4.62 22.8 1.16 2.96 1.59 15.4 < DL 2.31 2.55 17.8 < DL 5.50 2.79 3.57 < DL 3.69 4.42 46.8 PR3-Cg (Gr) (130-160cm) 0.15 1.94 5.46 19.1 0.70 3.19 1.81 14.4 < DL 1.51 3.31 11.3 3.53 3.27 4.41 1.00 < DL 3.07 4.12 25.1 PR3-Cg (160-200cm) 0.30 2.49 6.01 23.7 0.58 3.45 2.01 18.1 0.90 3.07 4.67 15.9 3.53 3.14 4.51 0.60 < DL 3.75 6.31 30.6 * Detection limit (DL) in mg/kg of Cr<0.072; Cu<0.010; Ni<0.027; Pb<0.073; Zn<0.006. Supplements 4b. The concentration in (mg/kg) of Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn as PTEs in geochemical fractions, obtained with BCR SEP, of soil samples from rural soil pro- files PR4 and PR5. Soil profile PR4 Chromium (mg/kg) Cupper (mg/kg) Nickel (mg/kg) Lead (mg/kg) Zinc (mg/kg) CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES PR4-P (0-32cm) 0.95 2.06 3.59 14.4 0.70 1.34 7.49 13.1 1.63 5.30 2.76 16.4 < DL 12.3 7.30 < DL 4.56 12.1 9.86 55.9 PR4-I/C (32-58cm) 1.03 2.06 3.67 14.2 0.95 2.49 3.48 14.1 *< DL 5.12 1.94 16.8 < DL 8.02 3.45 9.40 < DL 2.01 2.22 46.6 PR4-II/C (58-90cm) 0.97 1.87 5.49 18.2 0.75 2.09 4.04 19.7 0.85 2.98 2.93 24.2 < DL 9.10 6.25 11.2 < DL 2.16 3.07 64.9 PR4-III/C/G (90-115cm) 1.39 2.24 8.03 22.5 0.00 4.97 2.16 20.5 0.58 8.16 5.92 22.8 < DL 11.3 3.17 9.62 < DL 10.0 9.27 65.0 PR4-IV/C/G (115-160cm) 1.82 1.11 4.16 15.8 0.93 1.34 2.74 16.4 0.45 9.71 1.84 18.7 < DL 7.46 9.24 7.71 < DL 1.44 1.74 51.9 PR4-V/C/G (160-200cm) 1.14 0.90 4.24 12.6 0.88 1.94 2.61 12.7 < DL 8.89 2.03 17.0 < DL 7.16 9.75 5.50 < DL 1.54 1.71 39.2 Soil profile PR5 Chromium (mg/kg) Cupper (mg/kg) Nickel (mg/kg) Lead (mg/kg) Zinc (mg/kg) CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES CARB FEMN ORG RES PR5-P (0-30cm) 0.86 0.93 5.70 15.2 0.66 4.63 2.06 13.6 1.05 7.41 2.13 18.3 11.4 < DL 6.86 7.12 1.59 6.28 5.81 49.3 PR5-G (30-80cm) 1.25 1.06 4.43 15.7 0.68 4.42 1.50 14.7 0.81 2.33 2.61 18.6 < DL < DL 7.07 6.60 0.57 4.92 3.91 51.9 PR5-G (80-120cm) 0.90 1.45 3.71 15.3 0.91 4.01 1.35 21.6 0.45 2.46 3.91 23.8 < 0.073 12.7 2.34 6.30 < 0.006 3.73 3.26 58.6 * Detection limit (DL) in mg/kg of Cr<0.072; Cu<0.010; Ni<0.027; Pb<0.073; Zn<0.006.