Literature DB >> 18407389

Comparison of total mercury and methylmercury cycling at five sites using the small watershed approach.

James B Shanley1, M Alisa Mast, Donald H Campbell, George R Aiken, David P Krabbenhoft, Randall J Hunt, John F Walker, Paul F Schuster, Ann Chalmers, Brent T Aulenbach, Norman E Peters, Mark Marvin-DiPasquale, David W Clow, Martin M Shafer.   

Abstract

The small watershed approach is well-suited but underutilized in mercury research. We applied the small watershed approach to investigate total mercury (THg) and methylmercury (MeHg) dynamics in streamwater at the five diverse forested headwater catchments of the US Geological Survey Water, Energy, and Biogeochemical Budgets (WEBB) program. At all sites, baseflow THg was generally less than 1ng L(-1) and MeHg was less than 0.2ng L(-1). THg and MeHg concentrations increased with streamflow, so export was primarily episodic. At three sites, THg and MeHg concentration and export were dominated by the particulate fraction in association with POC at high flows, with maximum THg (MeHg) concentrations of 94 (2.56)ng L(-1) at Sleepers River, Vermont; 112 (0.75)ng L(-1) at Rio Icacos, Puerto Rico; and 55 (0.80)ng L(-1) at Panola Mt., Georgia. Filtered (<0.7microm) THg increased more modestly with flow in association with the hydrophobic acid fraction (HPOA) of DOC, with maximum filtered THg concentrations near 5ng L(-1) at both Sleepers and Icacos. At Andrews Creek, Colorado, THg export was also episodic but was dominated by filtered THg, as POC concentrations were low. MeHg typically tracked THg so that each site had a fairly constant MeHg/THg ratio, which ranged from near zero at Andrews to 15% at the low-relief, groundwater-dominated Allequash Creek, Wisconsin. Allequash was the only site with filtered MeHg consistently above detection, and the filtered fraction dominated both THg and MeHg. Relative to inputs in wet deposition, watershed retention of THg (minus any subsequent volatilization) was 96.6% at Allequash, 60% at Sleepers, and 83% at Andrews. Icacos had a net export of THg, possibly due to historic gold mining or frequent disturbance from landslides. Quantification and interpretation of Hg dynamics was facilitated by the small watershed approach with emphasis on event sampling.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18407389     DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2007.12.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Pollut        ISSN: 0269-7491            Impact factor:   8.071


  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.  Wet deposition flux and runoff output flux of mercury in a typical small agricultural watershed in Three Gorges Reservoir areas.

Authors:  Zheng Zhao; Dingyong Wang; Ya Wang; Zhijian Mu; Jinshan Zhu
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2014-10-24       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Biogeochemical controls on mercury methylation in the Allequash Creek wetland.

Authors:  Joel E Creswell; Martin M Shafer; Christopher L Babiarz; Sue-Zanne Tan; Abbey L Musinsky; Trevor H Schott; Eric E Roden; David E Armstrong
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-05-13       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Mobility of mercury in soil and its transport into the sea.

Authors:  Karolina Gębka; Dominika Saniewska; Magdalena Bełdowska
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2020-01-06       Impact factor: 4.223

5.  Factors affecting MeHg bioaccumulation in stream biota: the role of dissolved organic carbon and diet.

Authors:  Hannah J Broadley; Kathryn L Cottingham; Nicholas A Baer; Kathleen C Weathers; Holly A Ewing; Ramsa Chaves-Ulloa; Jessica Chickering; Adam M Wilson; Jenisha Shrestha; Celia Y Chen
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 2.823

6.  Mercury proxies and mercury dynamics in a forested watershed of the US Northeast.

Authors:  P Vidon; W Carleton; M J Mitchell
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 2.513

7.  Organic horizon and mineral soil mercury along three clear-cut forest chronosequences across the northeastern USA.

Authors:  Justin B Richardson; Chelsea L Petrenko; Andrew J Friedland
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-10-08       Impact factor: 4.223

8.  Tidally driven export of dissolved organic carbon, total mercury, and methylmercury from a mangrove-dominated estuary.

Authors:  Brian A Bergamaschi; David P Krabbenhoft; George R Aiken; Eduardo Patino; Darren G Rumbold; William H Orem
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2012-01-19       Impact factor: 9.028

9.  Challenges and opportunities for managing aquatic mercury pollution in altered landscapes.

Authors:  Heileen Hsu-Kim; Chris S Eckley; Dario Achá; Xinbin Feng; Cynthia C Gilmour; Sofi Jonsson; Carl P J Mitchell
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 5.129

10.  The impact of land use and season on the riverine transport of mercury into the marine coastal zone.

Authors:  Dominika Saniewska; Magdalena Bełdowska; Jacek Bełdowski; Michał Saniewski; Marta Szubska; Andrzej Romanowski; Lucyna Falkowska
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2014-08-02       Impact factor: 2.513

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.