Literature DB >> 11508309

Importance of the forest canopy to fluxes of methyl mercury and total mercury to boreal ecosystems.

V L St Louis1, J W Rudd, C A Kelly, B D Hall, K R Rolfhus, K J Scott, S E Lindberg, W Dong.   

Abstract

The forest canopy was an important contributor to fluxes of methyl mercury (MeHg) and total mercury (THg) to the forest floor of boreal uplands and wetlands and potentially to downstream lakes, at the Experimental Lakes Area (ELA), northwestern Ontario. The estimated fluxes of MeHg and THg in throughfall plus litterfall below the forest canopy were 2 and 3 times greater than annual fluxes by direct wet deposition of MeHg (0.9 mg of MeHg ha(-1)) and THg (71 mg of THg ha(-1)). Almost all of the increased flux of MeHg and THg under the forest canopy occurred as litterfall (0.14-1.3 mg of MeHg ha(-1) yr(-1) and 110-220 mg of THg ha(-1) yr(-1)). Throughfall added no MeHg and approximately 9 mg of THg ha(-1) yr(-1) to wet deposition at ELA, unlike in other regions of the world where atmospheric deposition was more heavily contaminated. These data suggest that dry deposition of Hg on foliage as an aerosol or reactive gaseous Hg (RGM) species is low at ELA, a finding supported by preliminary measurements of RGM there. Annual total deposition from throughfall and litterfall under a fire-regenerated 19-yr-old jack pine/birch forest was 1.7 mg of MeHg ha(-1) and 200 mg of THg ha(-1). We found that average annual accumulation of MeHg and THg in the surficial litter/fungal layer of soils since the last forest fire varied between 0.6 and 1.6 mg of MeHg ha(-1) and between 130 and 590 mg of THg ha(-1) among sites differing in drainage and soil moisture. When soil Hg accumulation sites were matched with similar sites where litterfall and throughfall were collected, measured fluxes of THg to the forest floor (sources) were similar to our estimates of longterm soil accumulation rates (sinks), suggesting that the Hg in litterfall and throughfall is a new and not a recycled input of Hg to forested ecosystems. However, further research is required to determine the proportion of Hg in litterfall that is being biogeochemically recycled within forest and wetland ecosystems and, thus, does not represent new inputs to the forest ecosystem.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11508309     DOI: 10.1021/es001924p

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Technol        ISSN: 0013-936X            Impact factor:   9.028


  10 in total

Review 1.  Bioaccumulation syndrome: identifying factors that make some stream food webs prone to elevated mercury bioaccumulation.

Authors:  Darren M Ward; Keith H Nislow; Carol L Folt
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 5.691

2.  Whole-ecosystem study shows rapid fish-mercury response to changes in mercury deposition.

Authors:  Reed C Harris; John W M Rudd; Marc Amyot; Christopher L Babiarz; Ken G Beaty; Paul J Blanchfield; R A Bodaly; Brian A Branfireun; Cynthia C Gilmour; Jennifer A Graydon; Andrew Heyes; Holger Hintelmann; James P Hurley; Carol A Kelly; David P Krabbenhoft; Steve E Lindberg; Robert P Mason; Michael J Paterson; Cheryl L Podemski; Art Robinson; Ken A Sandilands; George R Southworth; Vincent L St Louis; Michael T Tate
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-09-27       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Atmospheric mercury deposition and its contribution of the regional atmospheric transport to mercury pollution at a national forest nature reserve, southwest China.

Authors:  Ming Ma; Dingyong Wang; Hongxia Du; Tao Sun; Zheng Zhao; Shiqing Wei
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2015-08-23       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Controls on mercury and methylmercury deposition for two watersheds in Acadia National Park, Maine.

Authors:  K B Johnson; T A Haines; J S Kahl; S A Norton; Aria Amirbahman; K D Sheehan
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2006-10-21       Impact factor: 2.513

5.  Estimation and mapping of wet and dry mercury deposition across northeastern North America.

Authors:  Eric K Miller; Alan Vanarsdale; Gerald J Keeler; Ann Chalmers; Laurier Poissant; Neil C Kamman; Raynald Brulotte
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.823

6.  Patterns and interpretation of mercury exposure in freshwater avian communities in northeastern north America.

Authors:  David C Evers; Neil M Burgess; Louise Champoux; Bart Hoskins; Andrew Major; Wing M Goodale; Robert J Taylor; Robert Poppenga; Theresa Daigle
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.823

7.  Mercury concentrations in Bicknell's thrush and other insectivorous passerines in Montane forests of northeastern North America.

Authors:  Christopher C Rimmer; Kent P Mcfarland; David C Evers; Eric K Miller; Yves Aubry; Daniel Busby; Robert J Taylor
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.823

8.  Increased mercury in forest soils under elevated carbon dioxide.

Authors:  Susan M Natali; Sergio A Sañudo-Wilhelmy; Richard J Norby; Hong Zhang; Adrien C Finzi; Manuel T Lerdau
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2008-09-04       Impact factor: 3.225

9.  An Artificial Turf-Based Surrogate Surface Collector for the Direct Measurement of Atmospheric Mercury Dry Deposition.

Authors:  Naima L Hall; Joseph Timothy Dvonch; Frank J Marsik; James A Barres; Matthew S Landis
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Methyl and Total Mercury in Different Media and Associated Fluxes in a Watershed Forest, Southwest China.

Authors:  Hongxia Du; Ming Ma; Tao Sun; Siwei An; Yasuo Igarashi; Dingyong Wang
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 3.390

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.