<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.4 20241031//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-4.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.4" xml:lang="en">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Oalib</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Open Access Library Journal</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">2333-9721</issn>
      <issn pub-type="ppub">2333-9705</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/oalib.1115962</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">Oalib-154531</article-id>
      <article-categories>
        <subj-group>
          <subject>Article</subject>
        </subj-group>
        <subj-group>
          <subject>Biomedical</subject>
          <subject>Life Sciences</subject>
          <subject>Business</subject>
          <subject>Economics</subject>
          <subject>Chemistry</subject>
          <subject>Materials Science</subject>
          <subject>Computer Science</subject>
          <subject>Communications</subject>
          <subject>Earth</subject>
          <subject>Environmental Sciences</subject>
          <subject>Engineering</subject>
          <subject>Medicine</subject>
          <subject>Healthcare</subject>
          <subject>Physics</subject>
          <subject>Mathematics</subject>
          <subject>Social Sciences</subject>
          <subject>Humanities</subject>
        </subj-group>
      </article-categories>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Natural Radioactivity and Radiological Dose Assessment of Rocks from Mbeere South, Kenya</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
          <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0009-0004-8925-1013</contrib-id>
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Wambugu</surname>
            <given-names>James Ndirangu</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0009-0002-7207-4255</contrib-id>
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Ndeke</surname>
            <given-names>William</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0001-9306-3171</contrib-id>
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Mutie</surname>
            <given-names>Martin</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label> Department of Physical Sciences, Chuka University, Chuka, Kenya </aff>
      <author-notes>
        <fn fn-type="conflict" id="fn-conflict">
          <p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p>
        </fn>
      </author-notes>
      <pub-date pub-type="epub">
        <day>08</day>
        <month>10</month>
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      <pub-date pub-type="collection">
        <month>10</month>
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>13</volume>
      <issue>10</issue>
      <fpage>1</fpage>
      <lpage>18</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received">
          <day>30</day>
          <month>08</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="accepted">
          <day>13</day>
          <month>10</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="published">
          <day>16</day>
          <month>10</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>© 2026 by the authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2026</copyright-year>
        <license license-type="open-access">
          <license-p> This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link> ). </license-p>
        </license>
      </permissions>
      <self-uri content-type="doi" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1115962">https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1115962</self-uri>
      <abstract>
        <p>Natural radioactivity in rocks and building materials is a major contributor to outdoor gamma radiation exposure. This study determined the activity concentrations of <sup>238</sup>U (estimated via <sup>226</sup>Ra assuming secular equilibrium), <sup>232</sup>Th and <sup>40</sup>K and assessed radiological hazard indices in 30 purposively sampled rocks from Mbeere South, Embu County, Kenya using high-resolution HPGe gamma-ray spectrometry. Mean activity concentrations were 19.02 ± 14.00 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 38.66 ± 34.43 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> and 634.88 ± 302.94 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>2</sup><sup>38</sup>U, <sup>232</sup>Th and <sup>40</sup>K, respectively (<sup>40</sup>K &gt; <sup>232</sup>Th &gt; <sup>238</sup>U). <sup>238</sup>U was below the world average of 35 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, while <sup>232</sup>Th and <sup>40</sup>K were 28.9% and 58.7% above world averages of 30 and 400 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. Mean radium equivalent activity (Ra<sub>eq</sub>), absorbed dose rate (<italic>D</italic>) and outdoor annual effective dose (AED<sub>out</sub>) were 123.19 ± 73.10 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 58.61 ± 33.21 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> and 0.0719 ± 0.0407 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, respectively. All Ra<sub>eq</sub> values were below the 370 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> screening limit, and mean <italic>D</italic> and AED<sub>out</sub> were comparable to world averages of 59 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> and 0.07 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. These values were 53% - 91% lower than high-background areas in Kenya, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and Brazil, and comparable to Jaintiapur, Bangladesh. The results indicate low external gamma hazard; suitability with respect to indoor radon was not assessed.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group kwd-group-type="author-generated" xml:lang="en">
        <kwd>Natural Radioactivity</kwd>
        <kwd>Radium Equivalent</kwd>
        <kwd>Absorbed Dose</kwd>
        <kwd>Annual Effective Dose</kwd>
        <kwd>Mbeere South</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec1">
      <title>1. Introduction</title>
      <p>Natural radioactivity arises from the spontaneous disintegration of unstable atomic nuclei occurring naturally in the environment. The principal naturally occurring radionuclides contributing to terrestrial radiation are uranium-238 (<sup>238</sup>U), thorium-232 (<sup>232</sup>Th), and potassium-40 (<sup>40</sup>K) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1</xref>]. These radionuclides are widely distributed in rocks, soils, water bodies, and construction materials, making them important contributors to human exposure to ionizing radiation. Their activity concentrations are strongly influenced by lithology, mineral composition, geochemical processes, and weathering history. Since these radionuclides are ubiquitous in the Earth’s crust, exposure to natural radiation is unavoidable and constitutes the largest component of the radiation dose received by the general population [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">2</xref>].</p>
      <p>Human exposure to natural radiation occurs through both external and internal pathways. Because rocks are widely used as construction materials, elevated concentrations of naturally occurring radionuclides may contribute to indoor external gamma exposure and internal exposure through radon inhalation. External exposure results primarily from gamma radiation emitted by radionuclides present in rocks, soils, and building materials. Internal exposure occurs when radioactive substances enter the body through inhalation, ingestion, or absorption. Among the naturally occurring radionuclides, radon (<sup>222</sup>Rn), a decay product of <sup>238</sup>U, is of particular concern because it can accumulate in enclosed environments and significantly increase the risk of lung cancer. Long-term exposure to elevated levels of ionizing radiation has been associated with various adverse health effects, including genetic mutations, tissue damage, and an increased probability of cancer development [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">3</xref>]-[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">5</xref>]. Consequently, assessment of environmental radioactivity is essential for evaluating potential radiological risks to both humans and ecosystems.</p>
      <p>Terrestrial radiation originates primarily from the decay series of uranium and thorium and from the naturally occurring isotope potassium-40. The activity concentrations of these radionuclides in geological materials are influenced by lithology, mineral composition, weathering processes, and tectonic history. Igneous rocks, particularly granites and pegmatites, generally contain elevated concentrations of uranium and thorium, while sedimentary rocks often exhibit lower activity levels. Potassium-bearing minerals, particularly K-feldspars and micas commonly contribute to elevated <sup>40</sup>K activity concentrations in crystalline rocks. Because rocks constitute the parent material from which soils and many construction materials are derived, the determination of radionuclide concentrations in rocks provides important information regarding environmental radiation exposure and the suitability of geological materials for human use [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">6</xref>].</p>
      <p>Assessment of natural radioactivity in geological materials has gained increasing attention worldwide due to concerns regarding environmental safety and public health. According to United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) the worldwide average activity concentrations in rocks are approximately 35 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>238</sup>U, 30 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>232</sup>Th, and 400 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>40</sup>K [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>]. These reference values are widely used for evaluating the radiological significance of measured radionuclide concentrations. In addition to activity concentrations, several radiological hazard indices, including radium equivalent activity (Ra<sub>eq</sub>), absorbed dose rate (<italic>D</italic>) and annual effective dose (AED) are commonly employed to assess the potential health implications of exposure to natural radioactivity.</p>
      <p>Numerous studies conducted in different regions of the world have demonstrated substantial variability in natural radioactivity levels. Elevated background radiation has been reported in areas such as Ramsar in Iran and Kerala in India due to the presence of uranium- and thorium-rich geological formations [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">8</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">9</xref>]. Similar investigations have been carried out across Africa, where natural radioactivity levels are strongly influenced by local geology. Studies conducted in South Africa, Nigeria, and Angola have reported varying concentrations of naturally occurring radionuclides associated with granitic rocks, mineral deposits, and industrial activities [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">10</xref>]-[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">12</xref>]. These studies have highlighted the importance of site-specific assessments in establishing baseline radiation levels and identifying areas that may require continuous monitoring.</p>
      <p>In Kenya, investigations of natural radioactivity have been conducted in several geological settings, including the Ruri Hills region and areas associated with mineral exploitation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">13</xref>]. Elevated concentrations of thorium and uranium have been reported in some locations, emphasizing the influence of geological formations on radionuclide distribution. The increasing demand for mineral resources and construction materials further underscores the need for detailed radiological characterization of geological materials [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">14</xref>]. Such information is essential for environmental management, radiation protection, and sustainable utilization of natural resources.</p>
      <p>Mbeere South Constituency, located in Embu County, Kenya, is characterized by diverse lithological formations, active quarrying with widespread use of local rocks as building materials and mineral occurrences, including coltan-bearing rocks particularly within Kiambeere Ward. Coltan deposits are frequently associated with accessory minerals containing uranium and thorium, which may contribute to elevated natural radioactivity levels. Despite the increased exploration of coltan and other mineral resources in Mbeere South, limited information is available on the activity concentrations of naturally occurring radionuclides and the associated radiological hazards in rocks from the region. Consequently, the radiological characteristics and potential health implications of these geological materials remain poorly understood, highlighting the need for a comprehensive radiological assessment.</p>
      <p>Accordingly, this study quantified the activity concentrations of <sup>238</sup>U, <sup>232</sup>Th, and <sup>40</sup>K in rock samples collected from selected areas in Mbeere South using high-resolution HPGe gamma-ray spectrometry. In addition, radiological hazard indices were evaluated to assess potential health risks associated with exposure to natural radioactivity in the area. The findings provide baseline radiological data for Mbeere South, improve understanding of radionuclide distribution in Kenyan geological formations, and provide information useful for environmental radiation monitoring, mineral resource management, and radiation protection.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec2">
      <title>2. Materials and Methods</title>
      <sec id="sec2dot1">
        <title>2.1. Study Area</title>
        <p>The study was conducted in Mbeere South Constituency, Embu County in Kenya located between latitudes 0˚50.40'S and 0˚37.80'S, and longitudes 37˚35.40'E and 37˚48.0'E occupying an area of approximately 1312 km<sup>2</sup>. The constituency is comprised of five wards namely, from Mwea, Makima, Mbeti South, Mavuria, and Kiambeere wards. According to the 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census, Mbeere South had a population of 163,476 residents [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">15</xref>]. The constituency has a predominantly rural economy supported by agriculture, livestock keeping, trade, and natural resource exploitation including artisanal mineral extraction. The climate is largely semi-arid. Mbeere South, like much of Embu County, has a diverse geological composition that comprises the Precambrian Mozambique belt, which is part of the basement rocks dominated by gneisses, schists, granites, and pegmatites, together with localized sedimentary deposits [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">16</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">17</xref>]. These lithological characteristics make the area suitable for investigating the distribution of naturally occurring radionuclides and evaluating associated radiological hazards. The map of the sampling sites is shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">18</xref>].</p>
        <fig id="fig1">
          <label>Figure 1</label>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1115962-rId17.jpeg?20261016111021" />
        </fig>
        <p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref><bold>.</bold> Location of Mbeere South and sampling sites in Embu County, Kenya.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec2dot2">
        <title>2.2. Study Design</title>
        <p>This study employed an experimental and observational research design to determine the activity concentrations of naturally occurring radionuclides in rock samples collected from Mbeere South, Kenya. Field investigations involved in situ radiation measurements using a portable radiation survey meter, while laboratory analyses were performed using high-resolution HPGe gamma-ray spectrometry.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec2dot3">
        <title>2.3. Sample Collection and Preparation</title>
        <p>In-situ ambient dose rate screening was conducted at potential sites using a calibrated portable BR-9B XR1 Geiger-Müller (GM) detector (background ∼0.10 µSv∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>). Screening was used to guide selection and ensure inclusion of a range of lithologies and exposure conditions. Sampling was purposive, not random, based on accessibility, active quarrying status, and lithological variation observed after GM screening. Thirty rock samples were purposively selected with rock samples preferentially collected from sites showing relatively elevated or representative radiation levels, as well as from different geological settings, including quarries, seasonal riverbeds, hillsides, and mineralized zones in Mbeere South. The samples were collected from the five wards as follows: four samples from Mwea, one sample from Makima, thirteen samples from Mbeti South, three samples from Mavuria, and nine samples from Kiambeere. Results are therefore limited to the sampled sites and are not extrapolated to the entire Mbeere South constituency. The geographical coordinates of each quarry were recorded using a handheld GPS.</p>
        <p>Approximately 0.5 - 1.0 kg of fresh representative rock was collected from each selected site. The samples were immediately placed in clean, well-labelled polyethylene bags. Each sample was assigned a unique identification code (001-030) corresponding to its sampling location and carefully packaged to prevent cross-contamination and loss of material during transportation to Chuka University. At Chuka University Science Laboratory, the samples were pulverized into a fine homogeneous powder using hardened steel hammers, with cleaning between samples to avoid cross-contamination.</p>
        <p>The pulverized powders were transported to the Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology [INST], University of Nairobi, oven-dried at 80˚C for 8 h to constant mass, sieved through 1 mm mesh to obtain uniform particle size, homogenized, weighed, and packed into 500 g (500 ml) Marinelli beakers to ensure identical counting geometry. Beakers were hermetically sealed and stored for 30 days to allow <sup>226</sup>Ra and its short-lived progeny (<sup>−</sup>1214Pb, <sup>214</sup>Bi) and <sup>232</sup>Th series to attain secular equilibrium before measurement on HPGe [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">19</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">20</xref>].</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec2dot4">
        <title>2.4. Gamma-Ray Spectrometry</title>
        <p>The activity concentrations of <sup>226</sup>Ra (as a proxy for <sup>238</sup>U under secular equilibrium), <sup>232</sup>Th and <sup>40</sup>K in the 30 purposively selected rock samples from Mbeere South, screened with a handheld GM counter, were determined by high-resolution gamma-ray spectrometry at the Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology (INST), University of Nairobi. The system is equipped with a p-type coaxial High Purity Germanium detector (Baltic Scientific Instruments, Latvia) model GCW-30180 housed within a cylindrical multilayer graded shield and supported by a low-background lead shield to minimize external background radiation. The detector was operated at 3500 V bias, with energy resolution (FWHM) of 1.91 keV at 1332.5 keV of <sup>60</sup>Co and relative efficiency 27.8% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">21</xref>].</p>
        <p>To attain secular equilibrium between <sup>226</sup>Ra and its short-lived progeny, and between <sup>232</sup>Th and its daughters, sealed 500 ml Marinelli beakers containing 500 g of pulverized rock were stored for 30 days prior to counting. Each sample was counted for 36,000 s.</p>
        <p>Energy and efficiency calibrations were carried out using certified mixed radionuclide standard BB-3591 covering 60 - 3500 keV containing <sup>137</sup>Cs, <sup>241</sup>Am, <sup>60</sup>Co, <sup>88</sup>Y, <sup>57</sup>Co, <sup>113</sup>Sn and <sup>139</sup>Ce, traceable to international standards. Spectral acquisition was via SpectraLine-GP software. Background correction was performed by counting an empty Marinelli beaker filled with deionized water under identical geometry for 12 h and subtracting the background spectrum.</p>
        <p><sup>232</sup>Th was evaluated from weighted mean of <sup>212</sup>Pb (238.6 keV) and <sup>228</sup>Ac (911.1 keV), <sup>226</sup>Ra (proxy for <sup>238</sup>U) from <sup>214</sup>Pb (351.9 keV) and <sup>214</sup>Bi (609.3 keV), and <sup>40</sup>K directly from 1460.8 keV [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">22</xref>].</p>
        <p>Quality assurance was confirmed by concurrent analysis of Certified Reference Material IAEA-447 Natural and Anthropogenic Radionuclides in Moss-Soil with certified values: 25.1 ± 2.0 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>226</sup>Ra, 22.2 ± 0.8 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup><sup>238</sup>U, 21.8 ± 0.8 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>234</sup>U, with information 550 ± 18 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for values <sup>40</sup>K, 37.3 ± 2.0 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>232</sup>Th, 37.3 ± 1.5 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>212</sup>Pb, 37.3 ± 2.0 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>228</sup>Ac. Measured vs certified recoveries were 96.2% for <sup>238</sup>U (as <sup>226</sup>Ra), 98.5% for <sup>232</sup>Th and 102.3% for <sup>40</sup>K within acceptance 90% - 110%.</p>
        <p>The Minimum Detectable Activity (MDA) was 1.18 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>238</sup>U (as <sup>226</sup>Ra), 0.85 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>232</sup>Th, 12.4 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>40</sup>K. Uncertainties combined counting statistics and calibration, reported as ±1<italic>σ</italic>. Assessment is external gamma screening only; radon exhalation was not assessed.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec3">
      <title>3. Data Analysis and Radiological Hazard Assessment</title>
      <p>Activity concentrations were calculated using Spectraline GP (GCW-30180) software based on net peak areas corrected for efficiency and background. The activity concentration (A) of each radionuclide in Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup> in the studied samples was computed using Equation (1) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">19</xref>].</p>
      <disp-formula id="FD1">
        <label>(1)</label>
        <mml:math display="inline">
          <mml:mrow>
            <mml:mi>A</mml:mi>
            <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
            <mml:mfrac>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:mtext>cps</mml:mtext>
                <mml:mo>×</mml:mo>
                <mml:mn>1000</mml:mn>
              </mml:mrow>
              <mml:mrow>
                <mml:msub>
                  <mml:mi>ε</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mi>γ</mml:mi>
                </mml:msub>
                <mml:mo>×</mml:mo>
                <mml:msub>
                  <mml:mi>I</mml:mi>
                  <mml:mi>γ</mml:mi>
                </mml:msub>
                <mml:mo>×</mml:mo>
                <mml:mi>m</mml:mi>
              </mml:mrow>
            </mml:mfrac>
          </mml:mrow>
        </mml:math>
      </disp-formula>
      <p>where <italic>A</italic> represents activity concentration of the sample in Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, cps is the net counts per second (sample count rate minus background count rate), <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> ε </mml:mi><mml:mi> γ </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the counting efficiency of the gamma energy, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> I </mml:mi><mml:mi> γ </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> stands for absolute intensity of the gamma ray and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi> m </mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the sample’s net mass in grams.</p>
      <p>To evaluate the potential health risks associated with natural radioactivity in rocks, several radiological hazard indices were calculated.</p>
      <sec id="sec3dot1">
        <title>3.1. Calculation of Radium Equivalent Activity Concentration</title>
        <p>The radium equivalent activity (Ra<sub>eq</sub>) was calculated to assess the combined radiological hazard arising from <sup>226</sup>Ra, <sup>232</sup>Th and <sup>40</sup>K. The activity concentration of <sup>226</sup>Ra was assumed to be equal to that of <sup>238</sup>U under secular equilibrium. It was determined using Equation (2) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">20</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">21</xref>].</p>
        <disp-formula id="FD2">
          <label>(2)</label>
          <mml:math display="inline">
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>Ra</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>eq</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>Ra</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
              <mml:mn>1.43</mml:mn>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>Th</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
              <mml:mn>0.077</mml:mn>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mtext>K</mml:mtext>
              </mml:msub>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>where <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> C </mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mtext> Ra </mml:mtext></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> C </mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mtext> Th </mml:mtext></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> C </mml:mi><mml:mtext> K </mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the activity concentrations of <sup>226</sup>Ra, <sup>232</sup>Th and <sup>40</sup>K in Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. The recommended safety limit of Ra<sub>eq</sub> is 370 Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>].</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec3dot2">
        <title>3.2. Absorbed Dose Rate</title>
        <p>The absorbed dose rate (<italic>D</italic>) in air was calculated from the activity concentrations of <sup>226</sup>Ra, <sup>232</sup>Th, and <sup>40</sup>K to assess external gamma radiation exposure from the rock samples, assuming secular equilibrium between <sup>238</sup>U and <sup>226</sup>Ra following 30 days of sample storage. It was determined using the Equation (3) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">23</xref>].</p>
        <disp-formula id="FD3">
          <label>(3)</label>
          <mml:math display="inline">
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:mi>D</mml:mi>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mn>0.462</mml:mn>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>Ra</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
              <mml:mn>0.604</mml:mn>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>Th</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
              <mml:mn>0.0417</mml:mn>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
                <mml:mtext>K</mml:mtext>
              </mml:msub>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>where <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> C </mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mtext> Ra </mml:mtext></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> C </mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mtext> Th </mml:mtext></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> C </mml:mi><mml:mtext> K </mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the activity concentrations of <sup>226</sup>Ra, <sup>232</sup>Th, and <sup>40</sup>K in Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. The worldwide average outdoor absorbed dose rate is approximately 59 nGy∙h<sup>−1</sup>, and values significantly higher than this may indicate elevated natural background radiation levels [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>].</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec3dot3">
        <title>3.3. Outdoor Annual Effective Dose</title>
        <p>The outdoor annual effective dose (AED<sub>out</sub>) was estimated to evaluate the potential radiological health risk to members of the public from external gamma radiation emitted by natural radionuclides in the samples. The absorbed dose rate in air was converted to outdoor annual effective dose using the Equation (4) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">24</xref>].</p>
        <disp-formula id="FD4">
          <label>(4)</label>
          <mml:math display="inline">
            <mml:mrow>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>AED</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mtext>out</mml:mtext>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
              <mml:mi>D</mml:mi>
              <mml:mo>×</mml:mo>
              <mml:mtext>DCF</mml:mtext>
              <mml:mo>×</mml:mo>
              <mml:mi>T</mml:mi>
              <mml:mo>×</mml:mo>
              <mml:msub>
                <mml:mi>O</mml:mi>
                <mml:mi>f</mml:mi>
              </mml:msub>
              <mml:mo>×</mml:mo>
              <mml:msup>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mn>10</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
                <mml:mrow>
                  <mml:mo>−</mml:mo>
                  <mml:mn>6</mml:mn>
                </mml:mrow>
              </mml:msup>
            </mml:mrow>
          </mml:math>
        </disp-formula>
        <p>where AED<sub>out</sub> is the outdoor annual effective dose, <italic>D</italic> is the absorbed dose rate calculated in Equation 3, According to UNSCEAR 2000, the DCF (dose conversion factor) and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> O </mml:mi><mml:mi> f </mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (outdoor occupancy factor) values are 0.7 Sv/Gy and 0.2, respectively, <italic>T</italic> is the time factor (8760 hours per year). An outdoor occupancy factor, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi> O </mml:mi><mml:mi> f </mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo> = </mml:mo><mml:mn> 0.2 </mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was adopted in accordance with UNSCEAR recommendations, assuming that humans spend 20% of their time outdoors. The annual effective dose equivalent should not exceed 1 mSv∙y<sup>−1</sup> for safety purposes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>]. Values exceeding this level may indicate increased radiological exposure to the population and thus require further assessment. All radiological hazard indices were evaluated against internationally recommended reference limits to assess the suitability of the investigated rocks for use as building materials.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec4">
      <title>4. Results and Discussion</title>
      <sec id="sec4dot1">
        <title>4.1. Activity Concentrations</title>
        <p>The activity concentrations of the primordial radionuclides <sup>238</sup>U, <sup>232</sup>Th and <sup>40</sup>K in 30 rock samples from selected sites in Mbeere South are presented in <bold>Table 1</bold> while the variations in the concentrations of the naturally occurring radionuclides </p>
        <p><bold>Table 1</bold><bold>.</bold> Activity concentrations of <sup>238</sup>U, <sup>232</sup>Th and <sup>40</sup>K in rock samples.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl1">
          <label>Table 1</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>Sample ID</td>
                <td>Latitude</td>
                <td>Longitude</td>
                <td>
                  <sup>238</sup>
                  U(Bq∙kg
                  <sup>−</sup>
                  <sup>1</sup>
                  )
                </td>
                <td>
                  <sup>232</sup>
                  Th(Bq∙kg
                  <sup>−</sup>
                  <sup>1</sup>
                  )
                </td>
                <td>
                  <sup>40</sup>
                  K(Bq∙kg
                  <sup>−</sup>
                  <sup>1</sup>
                  )
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>001</td>
                <td>−0.683410</td>
                <td>37.809611</td>
                <td>27.87 ± 2.53</td>
                <td>38.65 ± 3.33</td>
                <td>407.21 ± 28.17</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>002</td>
                <td>−0.746494</td>
                <td>37.823190</td>
                <td>14.07 ± 1.98</td>
                <td>24.06 ± 2.61</td>
                <td>852.03 ± 39.96</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>003</td>
                <td>−0.732929</td>
                <td>37.812444</td>
                <td>19.92 ± 2.24</td>
                <td>48.09 ± 3.69</td>
                <td>422.98 ± 28.83</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>004</td>
                <td>−0.691957</td>
                <td>37.796815</td>
                <td>4.84 ± 1.17</td>
                <td>6.42 ± 1.50</td>
                <td>296.55 ± 24.57</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>005</td>
                <td>−0.691508</td>
                <td>37.800468</td>
                <td>52.68 ± 3.67</td>
                <td>57.91 ± 4.60</td>
                <td>820.29 ± 40.62</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>006</td>
                <td>−0.688825</td>
                <td>37.802630</td>
                <td>18.52 ± 2.25</td>
                <td>37.21 ± 3.37</td>
                <td>76.63 ± 13.43</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>007</td>
                <td>−0.666667</td>
                <td>37.805426</td>
                <td>12.40 ± 1.86</td>
                <td>15.63 ± 2.33</td>
                <td>681.62 ± 38.00</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>008</td>
                <td>−0.678616</td>
                <td>37.805580</td>
                <td>7.70 ± 1.48</td>
                <td>9.63 ± 1.79</td>
                <td>269.70 ± 24.57</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>009</td>
                <td>−0.675346</td>
                <td>37.810277</td>
                <td>7.10 ± 1.36</td>
                <td>6.64 ± 1.63</td>
                <td>436.33 ± 29.15</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>010</td>
                <td>−0.688524</td>
                <td>37.796317</td>
                <td>54.59 ± 3.87</td>
                <td>100.30 ± 5.72</td>
                <td>684.59 ± 38.65</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>011</td>
                <td>−0.701725</td>
                <td>37.788025</td>
                <td>14.48 ± 2.14</td>
                <td>55.98 ± 4.21</td>
                <td>902.14 ± 43.57</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>012</td>
                <td>−0.801840</td>
                <td>37.669708</td>
                <td>28.47 ± 2.93</td>
                <td>55.16 ± 4.27</td>
                <td>335.39 ± 27.84</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>013</td>
                <td>−0.782357</td>
                <td>37.602883</td>
                <td>16.70 ± 2.19</td>
                <td>28.83 ± 3.07</td>
                <td>548.59 ± 35.38</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>014</td>
                <td>−0.787470</td>
                <td>37.583526</td>
                <td>35.92 ± 2.78</td>
                <td>122.14 ± 5.61</td>
                <td>293.53 ± 90.41</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>015</td>
                <td>−0.799020</td>
                <td>37.565421</td>
                <td>31.47 ± 3.31</td>
                <td>107.58 ± 6.04</td>
                <td>1023.07 ± 46.19</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>016</td>
                <td>−0.798059</td>
                <td>37.547962</td>
                <td>5.60 ± 1.21</td>
                <td>6.12 ± 1.47</td>
                <td>332.44 ± 24.90</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>017</td>
                <td>−0.716620</td>
                <td>37.613240</td>
                <td>23.30 ± 2.54</td>
                <td>32.12 ± 3.14</td>
                <td>873.27 ± 43.90</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>018</td>
                <td>−0.700159</td>
                <td>37.601768</td>
                <td>28.18 ± 2.77</td>
                <td>67.63 ± 4.92</td>
                <td>1223.44 ± 50.12</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>019</td>
                <td>−0.695018</td>
                <td>37.608379</td>
                <td>40.93 ± 3.17</td>
                <td>21.50 ± 2.52</td>
                <td>743.63 ± 37.34</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>020</td>
                <td>−0.692195</td>
                <td>37.623628</td>
                <td>8.54 ± 1.34</td>
                <td>7.23 ± 1.53</td>
                <td>510.66 ± 30.14</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>021</td>
                <td>−0.692448</td>
                <td>37.623909</td>
                <td>18.61 ± 2.37</td>
                <td>74.80 ± 4.59</td>
                <td>986.31 ± 43.90</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>022</td>
                <td>−0.666667</td>
                <td>37.619957</td>
                <td>6.27 ± 1.31</td>
                <td>7.94 ± 1.65</td>
                <td>790.10 ± 38.33</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>023</td>
                <td>−0.657807</td>
                <td>37.624699</td>
                <td>3.91 ± 1.32</td>
                <td>5.34 ± 1.61</td>
                <td>474.15 ± 34.72</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>024</td>
                <td>−0.667197</td>
                <td>37.613844</td>
                <td>3.81 ± 1.27</td>
                <td>5.12 ± 1.63</td>
                <td>432.94 ± 34.40</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>025</td>
                <td>−0.669098</td>
                <td>37.604252</td>
                <td>4.18 ± 1.21</td>
                <td>5.63 ± 1.66</td>
                <td>485.69 ± 32.43</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>026</td>
                <td>−0.682896</td>
                <td>37.600908</td>
                <td>26.11 ± 2.90</td>
                <td>76.37 ± 5.29</td>
                <td>1138.68 ± 49.79</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>027</td>
                <td>−0.684563</td>
                <td>37.592560</td>
                <td>16.64 ± 2.43</td>
                <td>27.10 ± 2.61</td>
                <td>1057.67 ± 47.83</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>028</td>
                <td>−0.672974</td>
                <td>37.633876</td>
                <td>10.60 ± 1.85</td>
                <td>18.56 ± 2.63</td>
                <td>453.37 ± 31.78</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>029</td>
                <td>−0.661122</td>
                <td>37.692005</td>
                <td>23.83 ± 2.67</td>
                <td>85.32 ± 5.13</td>
                <td>1058.88 ± 46.84</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>030</td>
                <td>−0.657562</td>
                <td>37.612309</td>
                <td>3.23 ± 1.13</td>
                <td>4.82 ± 1.58</td>
                <td>434.43 ± 33.74</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>MEAN ± SD</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>19.02 ± 14.00</td>
                <td>38.66 ± 34.43</td>
                <td>634.88 ± 302.94</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>WORLD AVERAGE</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>35</td>
                <td>30</td>
                <td>400</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <p>are represented graphically as shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>. The values ranged from 3.23 ± 1.13 to 54.59 ± 3.87 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>238</sup>U, 4.82 ± 1.58 to 122.14 ± 5.61 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>232</sup>Th and 76.63 ± 13.43 to 1223.44 ± 50.12 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>40</sup>K. The mean activity concentrations were 19.02 ± 14.00 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>238</sup>U, 38.66 ± 34.43 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>232</sup>Th and 634.88 ± 302.94 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>40</sup>K.</p>
        <fig id="fig2">
          <label>Figure 2</label>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1115962-rId48.jpeg?20261016111021" />
        </fig>
        <p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref><bold>.</bold> Activity concentrations of U-238, Th-232 and K-40 in the investigated samples.</p>
        <p>The mean of <sup>238</sup>U was 45.7% below the world average of 35 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for rocks [UNSCEAR 2000]. Only 3 samples (005, 010, and 019) exceeded the world average, indicating generally low uranium content in Mbeere South basement. The relatively high value at 010 (54.59 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) may be consistent with localized enrichment in felsic intrusives, as uranium tends to concentrate in late-stage magmatic differentiates. These are presented as hypotheses based on regional geology.</p>
        <p>The mean of <sup>232</sup>Th was 28.9% above the world average of 30 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, indicating a slight thorium enrichment in the study area. The large standard deviation (SD) (34.43) shows high heterogeneity. Elevated values &gt; 70 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> at 010 (100.30 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), 014 (122.14 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), 015 (107.58 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), 021 (74.80 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), 026 (76.37 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) and 029 (85.32 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) are hypothetically consistent with the reported occurrence of accessory minerals such as monazite and zircon in gneissic rocks of the Mozambique Belt. Thorium is immobile and concentrates in resistate minerals, which could explain these hotspots. Samples with &lt;10 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> (004, 008, 009, 016, 020, 022, 025 and 030) may reflect quartzitic lithologies depleted in heavy minerals.</p>
        <p>The mean of <sup>40</sup>K was 58.7% above the world average of 400 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. Potassium is the dominant contributor to total activity in Mbeere South. 70% of samples exceeded 400 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. The highest values at 018 (1223.44 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), 026 (1138.68 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), 029 (1058.88 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), 027 (1057.67 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), 015 (1023.07 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) and 021 (986.31 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) are consistent with K-feldspar-rich lithologies such as granitic gneisses and pegmatites, which are commonly mapped in Mbeere South. The very low value at 006 (76.63 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) suggests a mafic enclave or quartz vein. Again, these lithological links are hypothetical and based on the geology of the Embu area [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">17</xref>].</p>
        <p>The order of mean activity is <sup>40</sup>K &gt; <sup>232</sup>Th &gt; <sup>238</sup>U, which is typical for crustal rocks where potassium is a major rock-forming element. The low <sup>238</sup>U/<sup>232</sup>Th ratio (mean 0.49) suggests thorium preferential enrichment, a common feature in weathered basement terrains. The mean activity concentrations obtained in this study were compared with mean activity concentrations from other regions of the world as shown in <bold>Table 2</bold>.</p>
        <p><bold>Table 2.</bold> Comparison of mean activity concentrations of <sup>238</sup>U, <sup>232</sup>Th and <sup>40</sup>K in rocks from Mbeere South with selected studies from other regions.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl2">
          <label>Table 2</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>Region/Country</td>
                <td>
                  <sup>238</sup>
                  U (Bq∙kg
                  <sup>−</sup>
                  <sup>1</sup>
                  )
                </td>
                <td>
                  <sup>232</sup>
                  Th (Bq∙kg
                  <sup>−</sup>
                  <sup>1</sup>
                  )
                </td>
                <td>
                  <sup>40</sup>
                  K (Bq∙kg
                  <sup>−</sup>
                  <sup>1</sup>
                  )
                </td>
                <td>References</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Mbeere South, Kenya</td>
                <td>19.02 ± 14.00</td>
                <td>38.66 ± 34.43</td>
                <td>634.88 ± 302.94</td>
                <td>This study</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Kerio Valley, Kenya</td>
                <td>94.47 ± 31</td>
                <td>65.0 ± 23</td>
                <td>1003.9 ± 217</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">25</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Northern Uganda</td>
                <td>57.1 ± 5.4</td>
                <td>122.3 ± 11.2</td>
                <td>914.2 ± 30.2</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">26</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Oyo, Nigeria</td>
                <td>355.95 ± 3.91</td>
                <td>709.17 ± 13.94</td>
                <td>1102.02 ± 22.05</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">27</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Anka, Nigeria</td>
                <td>63.29 ± 13.87</td>
                <td>226.67 ± 28.05</td>
                <td>832.59 ± 241.53</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">28</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Aja, Saudi Arabia</td>
                <td>103.80 ± 78.96</td>
                <td>477.2 ± 354.7</td>
                <td>780.6 ± 570.5</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">29</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Jaintiapur, Bangladesh</td>
                <td>25 ± 2</td>
                <td>37 ± 4</td>
                <td>884 ± 41</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">30</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>San Paulo, Brazil</td>
                <td>72.87 ± 71.65</td>
                <td>113.42 ± 102.88</td>
                <td>1127.54 ± 329.46</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">31</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>World Average</td>
                <td>35</td>
                <td>30</td>
                <td>400</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <p>The mean activity concentration of <sup>238</sup>U was 79.9% lower than Kerio Valley. Kerio Valley is underlain by alkaline syenites and granites with zircon and apatite that concentrate uranium. Mbeere South, though also in the Mozambique Belt, is dominated at sampled sites by quartzo-feldspathic migmatites where uranium U has been depleted by weathering and leaching, explaining the low values in samples 024 (3.81 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) and 030 (3.23 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>). It is 66.7% lower than Northern Uganda 57.1 ± 5.4 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 94.7% lower than Oyo, Nigeria 355.95 ± 3.91 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 70.0% lower than Anka, Nigeria 63.29 ± 13.87 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, and 81.7% lower than Aja, Saudi Arabia 103.80 ± 78.96 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. Oyo and Aja are documented High Natural Background Radiation Areas developed on uraniferous charnockites and peraluminous granites respectively [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">27</xref>][<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">29</xref>]. The fact that Mbeere South is 70% - 95% lower confirms the absence of such highly differentiated U-rich granites in the sampled sites.</p>
        <p>The only comparable value is Jaintiapur, Bangladesh 25 ± 2 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. Mbeere South is 23.9% lower than Jaintiapur, while Jaintiapur is only 31.4% higher than Mbeere. Jaintiapur is a sedimentary basin with sandstones and shales [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">30</xref>]. The similarity suggests Mbeere South accessible outcrops behave radiologically more like a low-U sedimentary terrain than a typical Kenyan basement granite. It is 73.9% lower than San Paulo, Brazil 72.87 ± 71.65 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, which is developed on alkaline intrusives [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">31</xref>].</p>
        <p>The mean activity concentration of <sup>232</sup>Th is 40.5% lower than Kerio Valley 65.0 ± 23 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 68.4% lower than Northern Uganda 122.3 ± 11.2 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 94.6% lower than Oyo 709.17 ± 13.94 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 82.9% lower than Anka 226.67 ± 28.05 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, and 91.9% lower than Aja 477.2 ± 354.7 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. The extremely high Th in Oyo, Anka and Aja is attributed to monazite and thorite-bearing granites [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">27</xref>]-[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">29</xref>]. The 82% - 94% lower values in Mbeere South suggest limited monazite content in the sampled gneisses.</p>
        <p>Importantly, Mbeere South is 4.5% higher than Jaintiapur 37 ± 4 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> and essentially comparable to it. Jaintiapur is 4.3% lower than Mbeere. This again groups Mbeere South with low-Th sedimentary terrains. It is 65.9% lower than San Paulo 113.42 ± 102.88 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. The large SD in Mbeere (±34.43) is due to two high samples 014 (122.14 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) and 015 (107.58 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) which hypothetically reflect local concentration of resistate Th-bearing minerals like zircon, versus low samples 030 (4.82 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) and 023 5.34 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> in quartz veins.</p>
        <p>The mean activity concentration of <sup>40</sup>K is 36.8% lower than Kerio 1003.9 ± 217 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 30.6% lower than Northern Uganda 914.2 ± 30.2 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 42.4% lower than Oyo 1102.02 ± 22.05 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 23.8% lower than Anka 832.59 ± 241.53 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 18.7% lower than Aja 780.6 ± 570.5 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 28.2% lower than Jaintiapur 884 ± 41 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> and 43.7% lower than San Paulo 1127.54 ± 329.46 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>.</p>
        <p>Although elevated versus world average, Mbeere K is 18% - 43% lower than the compared basement areas. The elevation is hypothetically attributed to K-feldspar and microcline in the Mozambique Belt gneisses, observed as very high values in 018 (1223.44 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), 026 (1138.68 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) and 015 (1023.07 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>). The low value 006 (76.63 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) likely represents a mafic band. High K is common in basement terrains and contributes less to dose than U and Th due to its lower dose conversion factor.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec4dot2">
        <title>4.2. Radiological Hazard Indices</title>
        <p>The radiological hazard indices calculated from activity concentrations are presented in <bold>Table 3</bold> while the variations in the radium equivalent activity, absorbed dose rate and annual effective dose values among the investigated sample are represented graphically in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>. Radium equivalent activity (Ra<sub>eq</sub>) ranged from 36.85 - 264.09 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> with a mean of 123.19 ± 73.10 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. The absorbed dose rate (<italic>D</italic>) ranged from 18.48 ± 1.47 to 122.18 ± 4.19 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> with a mean of 58.61 ± 33.21 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, while outdoor annual effective dose (AED<sub>out</sub>) ranged from 0.0227 - 0.1498 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> with a mean of 0.0719 ± 0.0407 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>.</p>
        <p>Ra<sub>eq</sub> values for all the 30 samples are below the screening limit of 370 Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup>. The mean is 66.7% below the limit. The maximum value from sample 015 (264.09 ± 9.91) Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup> is still 28.6% below limit, while minimum sample 004 (36.85 ± 3.09) Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup> is 90.0% below limit. High values 015 (264.09 ± 9.91), 010 (250.73 ± 9.53), 029 (227.37 ± 8.60), 026 (233.00 ± 8.96] and 018 (219.10 ± 8.49) hypothetically reflect local enrichment of Th-bearing resistate minerals in granitic gneiss, </p>
        <p><bold>Table 3</bold><bold>.</bold> Radium equivalent activity, absorbed dose rate and outdoor annual effective dose.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl3">
          <label>Table 3</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>
                  <bold>Sample</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>Ra</bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sub>eq</sub>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>(</bold>
                  <bold>Bq∙kg</bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>−</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>1</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>)</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <italic>
                    <bold>D</bold>
                  </italic>
                  <bold>(</bold>
                  <bold>nGy∙h</bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>−</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>1</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>)</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>AED</bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sub>out</sub>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>(</bold>
                  mSv∙y
                  <bold>
                    <sup>−</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>1</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>)</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>001</td>
                <td>114.49 ± 5.81</td>
                <td>53.20 ± 2.61</td>
                <td>0.0652 ± 0.0032</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>002</td>
                <td>114.08 ± 5.23</td>
                <td>56.56 ± 2.47</td>
                <td>0.0694 ± 0.0030</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>003</td>
                <td>121.26 ± 6.15</td>
                <td>55.89 ± 2.74</td>
                <td>0.0685 ± 0.0034</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>004</td>
                <td>36.85 ± 3.09</td>
                <td>18.48 ± 1.47</td>
                <td>0.0227 ± 0.0018</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>005</td>
                <td>198.65 ± 8.16</td>
                <td>93.52 ± 3.67</td>
                <td>0.1147 ± 0.0045</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>006</td>
                <td>77.63 ± 5.42</td>
                <td>34.23 ± 2.35</td>
                <td>0.0420 ± 0.0029</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>007</td>
                <td>87.24 ± 4.81</td>
                <td>43.59 ± 2.29</td>
                <td>0.0535 ± 0.0028</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>008</td>
                <td>42.24 ± 3.51</td>
                <td>20.62 ± 1.64</td>
                <td>0.0253 ± 0.0020</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>009</td>
                <td>50.19 ± 3.51</td>
                <td>25.49 ± 1.69</td>
                <td>0.0313 ± 0.0021</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>010</td>
                <td>250.73 ± 9.53</td>
                <td>114.35 ± 4.21</td>
                <td>0.1402 ± 0.0052</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>011</td>
                <td>164.00 ± 7.22</td>
                <td>78.12 ± 3.28</td>
                <td>0.0958 ± 0.0040</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>012</td>
                <td>133.17 ± 7.10</td>
                <td>60.46 ± 3.14</td>
                <td>0.0741 ± 0.0039</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>013</td>
                <td>100.17 ± 5.61</td>
                <td>48.00 ± 2.58</td>
                <td>0.0589 ± 0.0032</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>014</td>
                <td>233.18 ± 10.98</td>
                <td>102.61 ± 5.23</td>
                <td>0.1258 ± 0.0064</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>015</td>
                <td>264.09 ± 9.91</td>
                <td>122.18 ± 4.40</td>
                <td>0.1498 ± 0.0054</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>016</td>
                <td>39.95 ± 3.09</td>
                <td>20.15 ± 1.48</td>
                <td>0.0247 ± 0.0018</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>017</td>
                <td>136.47 ± 6.17</td>
                <td>66.58 ± 2.89</td>
                <td>0.0817 ± 0.0035</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>018</td>
                <td>219.10 ± 8.49</td>
                <td>104.89 ± 3.85</td>
                <td>0.1286 ± 0.0047</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>019</td>
                <td>128.93 ± 5.59</td>
                <td>62.91 ± 2.62</td>
                <td>0.0772 ± 0.0032</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>020</td>
                <td>58.20 ± 3.46</td>
                <td>29.61 ± 1.68</td>
                <td>0.0363 ± 0.0021</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>021</td>
                <td>201.52 ± 7.75</td>
                <td>94.91 ± 3.50</td>
                <td>0.1164 ± 0.0043</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>022</td>
                <td>78.46 ± 4.00</td>
                <td>40.64 ± 1.98</td>
                <td>0.0498 ± 0.0024</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>023</td>
                <td>48.06 ± 3.77</td>
                <td>24.80 ± 1.85</td>
                <td>0.0304 ± 0.0023</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>024</td>
                <td>44.47 ± 3.75</td>
                <td>22.91 ± 1.84</td>
                <td>0.0281 ± 0.0023</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>025</td>
                <td>49.63 ± 3.65</td>
                <td>25.58 ± 1.77</td>
                <td>0.0314 ± 0.0022</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>026</td>
                <td>223.00 ± 8.96</td>
                <td>105.67 ± 4.04</td>
                <td>0.1296 ± 0.0050</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>027</td>
                <td>136.83 ± 5.78</td>
                <td>68.16 ± 2.78</td>
                <td>0.0836 ± 0.0034</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>028</td>
                <td>72.05 ± 4.85</td>
                <td>35.01 ± 2.24</td>
                <td>0.0429 ± 0.0027</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>029</td>
                <td>227.37 ± 8.60</td>
                <td>106.70 ± 3.86</td>
                <td>0.1309 ± 0.0047</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>030</td>
                <td>43.57 ± 3.62</td>
                <td>22.52 ± 1.78</td>
                <td>0.0276 ± 0.0022</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>
                  <bold>Mean ± SD</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>123.19 ± 73.10</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>58.61 ± 33.21</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>0.0719 ± 0.0407</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>
                  <bold>Range</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>36.85 - 264.09</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>18.48 - 122.18</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>0.0227 - 0.1498</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>
                  <bold>World Average/Limit</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>370 (limit)</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>59 (average)</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>0.07 (average)</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <fig id="fig3">
          <label>Figure 3</label>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1115962-rId49.jpeg?20261016111021" />
        </fig>
        <p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref><bold>.</bold> Variation of radium equivalent activity, absorbed dose and annual effective dose among the samples.</p>
        <p>while low values 004 (36.85 Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup>), 016 (39.95 ± 3.09 Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup>), 030 (43.57 ± 3.62 Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup>), 024 (44.47 ± 3.75 Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) and 023 (48.06 ± 3.77 Bq∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) hypothetically reflect quartzitic bands. The high SD of ±73.10 indicates high heterogeneity within the Mozambique Belt lithology.</p>
        <p>The mean <italic>D</italic> is 0.66% below world average of 59 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. 12 of the 30 samples exceed world average. The highest <italic>D</italic> was in sample 015 (122.18 ± 4.40 nGy∙h<sup>−1</sup>) is 107.1% above the world average, 010 (114.35 ± 4.21 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) is 93.8% above, 029 (106.70 ± 3.86 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) is 80.8% above. The lowest <italic>D</italic> is 004 (18.48 ± 1.47 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) is 68.7% below world average. This pattern follows Ra<sub>eq</sub>, driven by <sup>232</sup>Th contribution (D factor 0.604).</p>
        <p>The mean AED<sub>out</sub> is 2.7% higher than world average 0.07 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. This is an outdoor external gamma value only. The highest AED<sub>out</sub> value 015 (0.1498 ± 0.0054 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) is 114% above world average, while the lowest 004 (0.0227 ± 0.0018 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) is 67.6% below.</p>
        <p>From an external gamma screening perspective, the 30 purposively sampled rocks show low radiological hazard. Mean Ra<sub>eq</sub> is well below 370 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, mean <italic>D</italic> is at world average and mean AED<sub>out</sub> is close to the world average. The rocks sampled may be considered suitable for use as building materials for external gamma. Suitability with respect to indoor radon exhalation cannot be concluded because radon was not assessed.</p>
        <p>The mean radiological hazard indices from the present study are compared with values reported in Kenya and other parts of the world as presented in <bold>Table 4</bold>.</p>
        <p><bold>Table 4</bold><bold>.</bold> Comparison of mean radiological parameters in the present study with values reported in other regions of the world.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl4">
          <label>Table 4</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>
                  <bold>Region/Country</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>Ra</bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sub>eq</sub>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>(</bold>
                  <bold>Bq∙kg</bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>−</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>1</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>)</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <italic>
                    <bold>D</bold>
                  </italic>
                  <bold>(</bold>
                  <bold>nGy∙h</bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>−</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>1</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>)</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>AED</bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sub>out</sub>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>(</bold>
                  <bold>mSv∙y</bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>−</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>
                    <sup>1</sup>
                  </bold>
                  <bold>)</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>Reference</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Mbeere South, Kenya</td>
                <td>123.19</td>
                <td>58.61</td>
                <td>0.0719</td>
                <td>This study</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Kerio, Kenya</td>
                <td>264.7</td>
                <td>124.78</td>
                <td>0.153</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">25</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Northern Uganda</td>
                <td>302.3</td>
                <td>138.34</td>
                <td>0.170</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">26</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Oyo, Nigeria</td>
                <td>1453.9</td>
                <td>638.55</td>
                <td>0.783</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">27</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Anka, Nigeria</td>
                <td>451.54</td>
                <td>200.91</td>
                <td>0.246</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">28</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Aja, Saudi Arabia</td>
                <td>846.7</td>
                <td>368.84</td>
                <td>0.452</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">29</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Jaintiapur, Bangladesh</td>
                <td>146.0</td>
                <td>70.72</td>
                <td>0.087</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">30</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>São Paulo, Brazil</td>
                <td>321.9</td>
                <td>149.15</td>
                <td>0.183</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">31</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>World Average/Safety Limit</td>
                <td>370</td>
                <td>59</td>
                <td>0.07</td>
                <td>
                  [
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>
                  ]
                </td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <p>Mbeere South samples are 53.5% lower in Ra<sub>eq</sub>, 53.0% lower in <italic>D</italic>, and 53.0% lower in AED<sub>out</sub> than those from Kerio Valley. Both are in basement complex, but Kerio values are more than double Mbeere South, hypothetically attributed to higher <sup>40</sup>K and <sup>232</sup>Th in Kerio phonolites. This shows significant heterogeneity within Kenya and that Mbeere South’s sampled outcrops are not a High Natural Background Radiation Area (HNBRA). Mbeere South is 59.2% lower in Ra<sub>eq</sub>, 57.6% lower in <italic>D</italic>, 57.7% lower in AED<sub>out</sub> than Northern Uganda. Northern Uganda granite has been reported with <sup>232</sup>Th up to 122.3 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> vs Mbeere’s mean of 38.66 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. The lower Th in Mbeere South hypothetically suggests less monazite enrichment. Mbeere South is 91.5% lower in Ra<sub>eq</sub>, 90.8% lower in <italic>D</italic>, 90.8% lower in AED<sub>out</sub>. Oyo exceeds Ra<sub>eq</sub> limit by 293%, while Mbeere is 66.7% below. Mbeere South is 72.7% lower in Ra<sub>eq</sub>, 70.8% lower in <italic>D</italic>, 70.8% lower in AED<sub>out</sub>. Anka exceeds Raeq limit by 22%. This confirms Mbeere South’s sampled sites are low-background compared to Nigerian pegmatite/granite terrains.</p>
        <p>Mbeere South is 85.4% lower in Ra<sub>eq</sub>, 84.1% lower in <italic>D</italic>, 84.1% lower in AED<sub>out</sub> than Aja. Aja is 129% above Ra<sub>eq</sub> limit. Mbeere South is 15.6% lower in Ra<sub>eq</sub>, 17.1% lower in <italic>D</italic>, 17.4% lower in AED<sub>out</sub>. Both are low-background sedimentary-influenced signatures despite Mbeere being basement, hypothetically due to quartzitic dilution. Mbeere South samples are 61.7% lower in Ra<sub>eq</sub>, 60.7% lower in <italic>D</italic>, 60.7% lower in AED<sub>out</sub> than those from São Paulo, Brazil.</p>
        <p>The 30 purposively selected rock samples from Mbeere South are 53% - 91% lower than High Natural Background Radiation Areas in Kenya, Uganda, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia. They are below the 370 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> external gamma screening limit. Suitability of the rocks as building materials is concluded for external gamma screening only, as indoor radon exhalation was not assessed.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec5">
      <title>5. Conclusions</title>
      <p>This study assessed the natural radioactivity and associated radiological hazards as an external gamma-screening assessment only for 30 purposively selected rock samples from selected sites in Mbeere South Constituency screened with a handheld GM counter. Selection was based on accessibility and elevated count rate, therefore results are limited to sampled areas. Mean activity concentrations were 19.02 ± 14.00 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>238</sup>U, 38.66 ± 34.43 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <sup>232</sup>Th and 634.88 ± 302.94 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for<sup>40</sup>K. <sup>232</sup>Th and <sup>40</sup>K exceed world averages of 30 and 400 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> by 28.9% and 58.7% respectively, while <sup>238</sup>U is 45.7% below global average of 35 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. The activity pattern <sup>40</sup>K &gt; <sup>232</sup>Th &gt; <sup>238</sup>U hypothetically reflects felsic gneissic lithology, with <sup>40</sup>K being dominant contributor to natural radioactivity, but lithological links remain hypotheses as thin-section analysis was not performed.</p>
      <p>The mean radiological hazard indices were 123.19 ± 73.10 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for Ra<sub>eq</sub>, 58.61 ± 33.21 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for <italic>D</italic> and 0.0719 ± 0.0407 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> for AED<sub>out</sub>, with ranges of 36.85 - 264.09 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 18.48 - 122.18 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> and 0.0227 - 0.1498 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, respectively. All samples recorded Ra<sub>eq</sub> below the construction screening limit of 370 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>], with mean 66.7% below limit. Mean <italic>D</italic> is 0.66% below world average 59 nGy∙h<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> and mean AED<sub>out</sub> is 2.7% above world average 0.07 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>], essentially at world average. No comparison is made with the 1 mSv∙y<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> public dose limit as it excludes natural background and radon. Spatial variability is hypothetically attributed to lithological heterogeneity, with relatively higher values in granitic gneiss zones and lower values in quartzitic zones.</p>
      <p>Compared to other regions, Mbeere South exhibits significantly lower radioactivity than high background areas such as Kerio Valley, Kenya, Oyo and Anka, Nigeria, Aja, Saudi Arabia and São Paulo, Brazil, being 53% - 91% lower in Ra<sub>eq</sub> and 51% - 90% lower in dose rate. Specifically, Mbeere South is 53.5% lower than Kerio 264.7 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 59.2% lower than Northern Uganda 302.3 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 91.5% lower than Oyo 1453.9 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, 72.7% lower than Anka 451.54 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> and 85.4% lower than Aja 846.7 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. Values are comparable only to low-background terrains such as Jaintiapur, Bangladesh (146.0 Bq∙kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), being only 15.6% lower, confirming sampled quarries as low natural background radiation areas for external gamma.</p>
      <p>It is concluded that rocks from the 30 purposively sampled rocks in Mbeere South pose insignificant external gamma radiological health risk and are radiologically suitable for use as construction materials from an external gamma perspective, subject to radon assessment. Suitability with respect to indoor radon cannot be concluded as radon exhalation was not assessed. Periodic monitoring and radon assessment are, however, recommended to establish baseline data for future anthropogenic modifications.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec6">
      <title>Acknowledgements</title>
      <p>The authors acknowledge the Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology (INST), University of Nairobi for facilitating gamma spectrometry analysis. We thank the Department of Physical Sciences, Chuka University for logistical support, and the Mbeere South community for granting access to sampling sites. We also appreciate the constructive comments of the OALib reviewers which improved this manuscript. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec7">
      <title>Author Contributions</title>
      <p>Conceptualization, J.N.W. and W.N.; methodology, J.N.W.; software, J.N.W.; validation, J.N.W., W.N. and M.M.; formal analysis, J.N.W.; investigation, J.N.W.; resources, W.N.; data curation, J.N.W.; writing—original draft preparation, J.N.W.; writing—review and editing, W.N. and M.M.; visualization, J.N.W.; supervision, W.N. and M.M.; project administration, W.N.; funding acquisition, not applicable. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <title>References</title>
      <ref id="B1">
        <label>1.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Alotaibi, M.F., Alharbi, K.N., Alosime, E.M., Alhawali, L.H., Albarqi, M.M. and Alsulami, R.A. (2024) Natural Radioactivity in Soil and Water of Saudi Arabia: A Mixed-Studies Review. <italic>Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences</italic>, 17, Article 100897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2024.100897 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jrras.2024.100897</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2024.100897">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2024.100897</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Alotaibi, M.F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Alharbi, K.N.</string-name>
              <string-name>Alosime, E.M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Alhawali, L.H.</string-name>
              <string-name>Albarqi, M.M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Alsulami, R.A.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2024</year>
            <article-title>Natural Radioactivity in Soil and Water of Saudi Arabia: A Mixed-Studies Review</article-title>
            <source>Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences</source>
            <volume>17</volume>
            <elocation-id>100897</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jrras.2024.100897</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B2">
        <label>2.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Bathoum, D., Semghouli, S. and Choukri, A. (2025) Cosmic Radiation Exposure Calculation for Domestic Flights Departs from Fez. 2025 11 <italic>th International Conference on Optimization and Applications</italic> ( <italic>ICOA</italic>), Kenitra, 16-17 October 2025, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1109/icoa66896.2025.11236883 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1109/icoa66896.2025.11236883</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/icoa66896.2025.11236883">https://doi.org/10.1109/icoa66896.2025.11236883</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="confproc">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Bathoum, D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Semghouli, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Choukri, A.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2025</year>
            <article-title>Cosmic Radiation Exposure Calculation for Domestic Flights Departs from Fez</article-title>
            <source>2025 11th International Conference on Optimization and Applications (ICOA)</source>
            <volume>16</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1109/icoa66896.2025.11236883</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B3">
        <label>3.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Wen, H. (2024) Research Progress on the Impact of Nuclear Radiation in Food on Human Health. <italic>Highlights in Science</italic>, <italic>Engineering and Technology</italic>, 91, 105-117. https://doi.org/10.54097/19r9am21 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.54097/19r9am21</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.54097/19r9am21">https://doi.org/10.54097/19r9am21</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Wen, H.</string-name>
              <string-name>Science, E</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2024</year>
            <article-title>Research Progress on the Impact of Nuclear Radiation in Food on Human Health</article-title>
            <source>Highlights in Science</source>
            <volume>91</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.54097/19r9am21</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B4">
        <label>4.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Talapko, J., Talapko, D., Katalinić, D., Kotris, I., Erić, I., Belić, D., <italic>et al</italic>. (2024) Health Effects of Ionizing Radiation on the Human Body. <italic>Medicina</italic>, 60, Article 653. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60040653 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/medicina60040653</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">38674299</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60040653">https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60040653</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Talapko, J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Talapko, D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Kotris, I.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2024</year>
            <article-title>Health Effects of Ionizing Radiation on the Human Body</article-title>
            <source>Medicina</source>
            <volume>60</volume>
            <elocation-id>653</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/medicina60040653</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">38674299</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B5">
        <label>5.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Raham, A. and Al-Attabi, H. (2023) Estimating the Risk of Exposure to Internal and External Radiation Resulting from Portland Cement. <italic>Journal</italic><italic>of</italic><italic>Wasit</italic><italic>for</italic><italic>Science</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Medicine</italic>, 16, 88-96. https://doi.org/10.31185/jwsm.560 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.31185/jwsm.560</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.31185/jwsm.560">https://doi.org/10.31185/jwsm.560</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Raham, A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Al-Attabi, H.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2023</year>
            <article-title>Estimating the Risk of Exposure to Internal and External Radiation Resulting from Portland Cement</article-title>
            <source>Journal of Wasit for Science and Medicine</source>
            <volume>16</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.31185/jwsm.560</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B6">
        <label>6.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Jha, S.K., Patra, A.C., Verma, G.P., Iyer, I.S. and Aswal, D.K. (2024) Natural Radiation and Environment. In: <italic>Handbook</italic><italic>on</italic><italic>Radiation</italic><italic>Environment</italic>, <italic>Volume</italic><italic>1</italic>, Springer, 27-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-2795-7_2 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/978-981-97-2795-7_2</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-2795-7_2">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-2795-7_2</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Jha, S.K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Patra, A.C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Verma, G.P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Iyer, I.S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Aswal, D.K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Environment, V</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2024</year>
            <article-title>Natural Radiation and Environment</article-title>
            <source>In: Handbook on Radiation Environment</source>
            <volume>27</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/978-981-97-2795-7_2</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B7">
        <label>7.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="report">United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) (2000) Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation. UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes. Volume I: Sources. United Nations.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="report">
            <year>2000</year>
            <article-title>Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation</article-title>
            <source>UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly</source>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B8">
        <label>8.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Monfared, A.S., Jalali, F., Sedaghat, S., Mansoorizade, E., Jarrahi, A.M., Hajiahmadi, M., <italic>et al</italic>. (2006) High Natural Background Radiation Areas in Ramsar, Iran: Can Inhabitants Feel Safe? <italic>International Journal of Low Radiation</italic>, 3, 171-177. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijlr.2006.012016 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1504/ijlr.2006.012016</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1504/ijlr.2006.012016">https://doi.org/10.1504/ijlr.2006.012016</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Monfared, A.S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Jalali, F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Sedaghat, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Mansoorizade, E.</string-name>
              <string-name>Jarrahi, A.M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Hajiahmadi, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Ramsar, I</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2006</year>
            <article-title>High Natural Background Radiation Areas in Ramsar, Iran: Can Inhabitants Feel Safe? International Journal of Low Radiation, 3, 171-177</article-title>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1504/ijlr.2006.012016</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B9">
        <label>9.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Thomas, J.R., Sreejith, M.V., Aravind, U.K., Sahu, S.K., Shetty, P.G., Swarnakar, M., <italic>et al</italic>. (2022) Outdoor and Indoor Natural Background Gamma Radiation across Kerala, India. <italic>Environmental Science: Atmospheres</italic>, 2, 65-72. https://doi.org/10.1039/d1ea00033k <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1039/d1ea00033k</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1039/d1ea00033k">https://doi.org/10.1039/d1ea00033k</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Thomas, J.R.</string-name>
              <string-name>Sreejith, M.V.</string-name>
              <string-name>Aravind, U.K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Sahu, S.K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Shetty, P.G.</string-name>
              <string-name>Swarnakar, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Kerala, I</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2022</year>
            <article-title>Outdoor and Indoor Natural Background Gamma Radiation across Kerala, India</article-title>
            <source>Environmental Science: Atmospheres</source>
            <volume>2</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1039/d1ea00033k</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B10">
        <label>10.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="thesis">Mbatha, N.B. (2007) Radiometric Study of Beach Sand Deposits along the Coast of Western Cape Province, South Africa. PhD Thesis, University of the Western Cape.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="thesis">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Mbatha, N.B.</string-name>
              <string-name>Province, S</string-name>
              <string-name>Thesis, U</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2007</year>
            <article-title>Radiometric Study of Beach Sand Deposits along the Coast of Western Cape Province, South Africa</article-title>
            <source>PhD Thesis</source>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B11">
        <label>11.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Isinkaye, O.M., Jibiri, N.N. and Olomide, A.A. (2015) Radiological Health Assessment of Natural Radioactivity in the Vicinity of Obajana Cement Factory, North Central Nigeria. <italic>Journal</italic><italic>of</italic><italic>Medical</italic><italic>Physics</italic>, 40, 52-59. https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-6203.152256 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4103/0971-6203.152256</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26150688</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-6203.152256">https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-6203.152256</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Isinkaye, O.M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Jibiri, N.N.</string-name>
              <string-name>Olomide, A.A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Factory, N</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2015</year>
            <article-title>Radiological Health Assessment of Natural Radioactivity in the Vicinity of Obajana Cement Factory, North Central Nigeria</article-title>
            <source>Journal of Medical Physics</source>
            <volume>40</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4103/0971-6203.152256</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26150688</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B12">
        <label>12.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Salupeto-Dembo, J., Szabó-Krausz, Z., Völgyesi, P., Kis, Z. and Szabό, C. (2020) External Radiation Exposure of the Angolan Population Living in Adobe Houses. <italic>Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry</italic>, 323, 353-364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-019-06920-z <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10967-019-06920-z</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-019-06920-z">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-019-06920-z</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Salupeto-Dembo, J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Krausz, Z.</string-name>
              <string-name>Kis, Z.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2020</year>
            <article-title>External Radiation Exposure of the Angolan Population Living in Adobe Houses</article-title>
            <source>Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry</source>
            <volume>323</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10967-019-06920-z</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B13">
        <label>13.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Achola, S.O., Patel, J.P., Mustapha, A.O. and Angeyo, H.K. (2012) Natural Radioactivity and External Dose in the High Background Radiation Area of Lambwe East, South Western Kenya. <italic>Radiation Protection Dosimetry</italic>, 152, 423-428. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncs047 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/rpd/ncs047</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22535833</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncs047">https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncs047</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Achola, S.O.</string-name>
              <string-name>Patel, J.P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Mustapha, A.O.</string-name>
              <string-name>Angeyo, H.K.</string-name>
              <string-name>East, S</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2012</year>
            <article-title>Natural Radioactivity and External Dose in the High Background Radiation Area of Lambwe East, South Western Kenya</article-title>
            <source>Radiation Protection Dosimetry</source>
            <volume>152</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/rpd/ncs047</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22535833</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B14">
        <label>14.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Atibu, E.K., Arpagaus, P., Mulaji, C.K., Mpiana, P.T., Poté, J., Loizeau, J., <italic>et al</italic>. (2022) High Environmental Radioactivity in Artisanal and Small-Scale Gold Mining in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. <italic>Minerals</italic>, 12, Article 1278. https://doi.org/10.3390/min12101278 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/min12101278</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/min12101278">https://doi.org/10.3390/min12101278</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Atibu, E.K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Arpagaus, P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Mulaji, C.K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Mpiana, P.T.</string-name>
              <string-name>Loizeau, J.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2022</year>
            <article-title>High Environmental Radioactivity in Artisanal and Small-Scale Gold Mining in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo</article-title>
            <source>Minerals</source>
            <volume>12</volume>
            <elocation-id>1278</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/min12101278</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B15">
        <label>15.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (2019) 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census Volume I: Population by County and Sub-County. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <year>2019</year>
            <article-title>2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census Volume I: Population by County and Sub-County</article-title>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B16">
        <label>16.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Key, R.M., Charsley, T.J., Hackman, B.D., Wilkinson, A.F. and Rundle, C.C. (1989) The Geology of the Mozambique Belt and Adjacent Areas of Kenya. British Geological Survey.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Key, R.M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Charsley, T.J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Hackman, B.D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wilkinson, A.F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Rundle, C.C.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>1989</year>
            <article-title>The Geology of the Mozambique Belt and Adjacent Areas of Kenya</article-title>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B17">
        <label>17.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="thesis">Githenya, L.K. (2020) Geology and Economic Mineralization of the Neoproterozoic Mozambique Belt Rocks of the Mwitika-Makongo Area, Kitui County, South Eastern Kenya. Master’s Thesis, South Eastern Kenya University.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="thesis">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Githenya, L.K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Area, K</string-name>
              <string-name>County, S</string-name>
              <string-name>Thesis, S</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2020</year>
            <article-title>Geology and Economic Mineralization of the Neoproterozoic Mozambique Belt Rocks of the Mwitika-Makongo Area, Kitui County, South Eastern Kenya</article-title>
            <source>Master’s Thesis</source>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B18">
        <label>18.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">State Department for Physical Planning (2026) Embu County National Spatial Plan Guidelines. Ministry of Lands, Public Works, Housing and Urban Development, Government of Kenya.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Lands, P</string-name>
              <string-name>Works, H</string-name>
              <string-name>Development, G</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2026</year>
            <article-title>Embu County National Spatial Plan Guidelines</article-title>
            <source>Ministry of Lands</source>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B19">
        <label>19.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Bangou, C., Otoo, F. and Darko, E.O. (2021) Performance Testing and Comparative Study of Natural Radioactivity in Soil Samples Using High Purity Germanium (HPGe) Detector. <italic>MethodsX</italic>, 8, Article 101397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2021.101397 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.mex.2021.101397</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">34430293</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2021.101397">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2021.101397</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Bangou, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Otoo, F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Darko, E.O.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2021</year>
            <article-title>Performance Testing and Comparative Study of Natural Radioactivity in Soil Samples Using High Purity Germanium (HPGe) Detector</article-title>
            <source>MethodsX</source>
            <volume>8</volume>
            <elocation-id>101397</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.mex.2021.101397</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">34430293</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B20">
        <label>20.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">Barros, L.F. and Pecequilo, B.R.S. (2013) Evaluation of Ra, Th, K and Radium Equivalent Activity in Sand Samples from Camburi Beach, Vitoria, Espirito Santos, Brazil. <italic>International Nuclear Atlantic Conference</italic> ( <italic>INAC</italic> 2013), Recife, 24-29 November 2013. Brazilian Association of Nuclear Energy.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="confproc">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Barros, L.F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Pecequilo, B.R.S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Ra, T</string-name>
              <string-name>Beach, V</string-name>
              <string-name>Santos, B</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2013</year>
            <article-title>Evaluation of Ra, Th, K and Radium Equivalent Activity in Sand Samples from Camburi Beach, Vitoria, Espirito Santos, Brazil</article-title>
            <source>International Nuclear Atlantic Conference (INAC 2013)</source>
            <volume>24</volume>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B21">
        <label>21.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="report">United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) (2021) Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation: UNSCEAR 2020/2021 Report. United Nations.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="report">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Sources, E</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2021</year>
            <article-title>Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation: UNSCEAR 2020/2021 Report</article-title>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B22">
        <label>22.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="report">United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (2000) Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation: UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes. United Nations.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="report">
            <year>2000</year>
            <article-title>Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation: UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes</article-title>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B23">
        <label>23.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Guérin, G., Christophe, C., Philippe, A., Murray, A.S., Thomsen, K.J., Tribolo, C., <italic>et</italic><italic>al</italic>. (2017) Absorbed Dose, Equivalent Dose, Measured Dose Rates, and Implications for OSL Age Estimates: Introducing the Average Dose Model. <italic>Quaternary Geochronology</italic>, 41, 163-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quageo.2017.04.002 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.quageo.2017.04.002</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quageo.2017.04.002">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quageo.2017.04.002</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Christophe, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Philippe, A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Murray, A.S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Thomsen, K.J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Tribolo, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Dose, E</string-name>
              <string-name>Dose, M</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2017</year>
            <article-title>Absorbed Dose, Equivalent Dose, Measured Dose Rates, and Implications for OSL Age Estimates: Introducing the Average Dose Model</article-title>
            <source>Quaternary Geochronology</source>
            <volume>41</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.quageo.2017.04.002</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B24">
        <label>24.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Pintilie-Nicolov, V., Georgescu, P.L., Iticescu, C., Moraru, D.I. and Pintilie, A.G. (2021) The Assessment of the Annual Effective Dose Due to Ingestion of Radionuclides from Drinking Water Consumption: Calculation Methods. <italic>Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry</italic>, 327, 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-020-07438-5 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10967-020-07438-5</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-020-07438-5">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-020-07438-5</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Pintilie-Nicolov, V.</string-name>
              <string-name>Georgescu, P.L.</string-name>
              <string-name>Iticescu, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Moraru, D.I.</string-name>
              <string-name>Pintilie, A.G.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2021</year>
            <article-title>The Assessment of the Annual Effective Dose Due to Ingestion of Radionuclides from Drinking Water Consumption: Calculation Methods</article-title>
            <source>Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry</source>
            <volume>327</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10967-020-07438-5</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B25">
        <label>25.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Agora, J.O. and Hashim, N.O. (2015) Assessment of Radioactivity Levels and Risks Due to Different Rock Types from the KERIO Valley ‘High Background Radiation Area (HBRA)’ of Kenya. <italic>International Journal of Mathematics and Physical Sciences Research</italic>, 3, 40-47.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Agora, J.O.</string-name>
              <string-name>Hashim, N.O.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2015</year>
            <article-title>Assessment of Radioactivity Levels and Risks Due to Different Rock Types from the KERIO Valley ‘High Background Radiation Area (HBRA)’ of Kenya</article-title>
            <source>International Journal of Mathematics and Physical Sciences Research</source>
            <volume>3</volume>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B26">
        <label>26.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Olanya, A., Okello, D., Oruru, B. and Kisolo, A. (2022) The Primordial Radionuclides Activity Concentrations and Associated Minerals in Rocks from Selected Quarries in Northern Uganda. <italic>International Journal of Sciences</italic>: <italic>Basic and Applied Research</italic>, 66, 45-65.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Olanya, A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Okello, D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Oruru, B.</string-name>
              <string-name>Kisolo, A.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2022</year>
            <article-title>The Primordial Radionuclides Activity Concentrations and Associated Minerals in Rocks from Selected Quarries in Northern Uganda</article-title>
            <source>International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research</source>
            <volume>66</volume>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B27">
        <label>27.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Ajetunmobi, A.E., Biere, P., Alausa, S.K., Coker, J.O., David, T.W., Talabi, A.T., <italic>et al</italic>. (2022) Measurement of Activity Concentrations of Rock Samples from Rocks-Surrounded Town in Igbeti, Oyo State, Nigeria. <italic>Scientia Africana</italic>, 21, 183-194. https://doi.org/10.4314/sa.v21i1.16 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4314/sa.v21i1.16</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4314/sa.v21i1.16">https://doi.org/10.4314/sa.v21i1.16</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Ajetunmobi, A.E.</string-name>
              <string-name>Biere, P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Alausa, S.K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Coker, J.O.</string-name>
              <string-name>David, T.W.</string-name>
              <string-name>Talabi, A.T.</string-name>
              <string-name>Igbeti, O</string-name>
              <string-name>State, N</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2022</year>
            <article-title>Measurement of Activity Concentrations of Rock Samples from Rocks-Surrounded Town in Igbeti, Oyo State, Nigeria</article-title>
            <source>Scientia Africana</source>
            <volume>21</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4314/sa.v21i1.16</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B28">
        <label>28.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Akpanowo, M., Umaru, I., Iyakwari, S., Joshua, E.O., Yusuf, S. and Ekong, G.B. (2020) Determination of Natural Radioactivity Levels and Radiological Hazards in Environmental Samples from Artisanal Mining Sites of Anka, North-West Nigeria. <italic>Scientific African</italic>, 10, e00561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00561 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00561</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00561">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00561</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Akpanowo, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Umaru, I.</string-name>
              <string-name>Iyakwari, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Joshua, E.O.</string-name>
              <string-name>Yusuf, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Ekong, G.B.</string-name>
              <string-name>Anka, N</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2020</year>
            <article-title>Determination of Natural Radioactivity Levels and Radiological Hazards in Environmental Samples from Artisanal Mining Sites of Anka, North-West Nigeria</article-title>
            <source>Scientific African</source>
            <volume>10</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00561</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B29">
        <label>29.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Kinsara, A.A., Shabana, E.I. and Qutub, M.M.T. (2014) Natural Radioactivity in Some Building Materials Originating from a High Background Radiation Area. <italic>International</italic><italic>Journal</italic><italic>for</italic><italic>Innovation</italic><italic>Education</italic><italic>and</italic><italic>Research</italic>, 2, 70-78. https://doi.org/10.31686/ijier.vol2.iss6.195 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.31686/ijier.vol2.iss6.195</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.31686/ijier.vol2.iss6.195">https://doi.org/10.31686/ijier.vol2.iss6.195</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Kinsara, A.A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Shabana, E.I.</string-name>
              <string-name>Qutub, M.M.T.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2014</year>
            <article-title>Natural Radioactivity in Some Building Materials Originating from a High Background Radiation Area</article-title>
            <source>International Journal for Innovation Education and Research</source>
            <volume>2</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.31686/ijier.vol2.iss6.195</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B30">
        <label>30.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Dina, N.T., Das, S.C., Kabir, M.Z., Rasul, M.G., Deeba, F., Rajib, M., <italic>et al</italic>. (2022) Natural Radioactivity and Its Radiological Implications from Soils and Rocks in Jaintiapur Area, North-East Bangladesh. <italic>Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry</italic>, 331, 4457-4468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-022-08562-0 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10967-022-08562-0</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">36247017</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-022-08562-0">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-022-08562-0</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Dina, N.T.</string-name>
              <string-name>Das, S.C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Kabir, M.Z.</string-name>
              <string-name>Rasul, M.G.</string-name>
              <string-name>Deeba, F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Rajib, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Area, N</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2022</year>
            <article-title>Natural Radioactivity and Its Radiological Implications from Soils and Rocks in Jaintiapur Area, North-East Bangladesh</article-title>
            <source>Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry</source>
            <volume>331</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10967-022-08562-0</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">36247017</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B31">
        <label>31.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Moura, C.L., Artur, A.C., Bonotto, D.M., Guedes, S. and Martinelli, C.D. (2011) Natural Radioactivity and Radon Exhalation Rate in Brazilian Igneous Rocks. <italic>Applied Radiation and Isotopes</italic>, 69, 1094-1099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2011.03.004 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.apradiso.2011.03.004</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21459585</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2011.03.004">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2011.03.004</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Moura, C.L.</string-name>
              <string-name>Artur, A.C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Bonotto, D.M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Guedes, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Martinelli, C.D.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2011</year>
            <article-title>Natural Radioactivity and Radon Exhalation Rate in Brazilian Igneous Rocks</article-title>
            <source>Applied Radiation and Isotopes</source>
            <volume>69</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.apradiso.2011.03.004</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21459585</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>