Literature DB >> 19771512

Mercury concentrations in wetlands associated with coal-fired power plants.

Scott M Weir1, Richard S Halbrook, Donald W Sparling.   

Abstract

There have been contradictory reports of the relative proportion of mercury from coal-fired power plants that deposits locally. Our objective was to determine any local effect of coal-fired power plants on total mercury concentrations in wetland sediment and tadpole samples. Four power plants and 45 wetlands were selected for study. Total mercury concentrations were determined in 75 sediment samples (range: 8-82 ng/g dry weight) and 100 bullfrog (Lithobates catesbeiana) and green frog (Lithobates clamitans) tadpoles (range: 5-318 ng/g wet weight). Tadpole and sediment total mercury did not significantly vary by power plant or distance from the plant. Only one power plant had a significantly greater concentration of total mercury in sediment downwind compared to upwind wetlands. A similar (but non-significant) trend was found for tadpole total mercury surrounding the same plant. Tadpole total mercury was negatively correlated with both tadpole weight and total length. Tadpole and sediment total mercury concentrations were not significantly correlated with one another. The results of the current study suggest that coal-fired power plants are not significantly affecting mercury concentrations in surrounding wetlands.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19771512     DOI: 10.1007/s10646-009-0413-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecotoxicology        ISSN: 0963-9292            Impact factor:   2.823


  24 in total

1.  Mercury in sediment and fish from North Mississippi Lakes.

Authors:  D B Huggett; J A Steevens; J C Allgood; C B Lutken; C A Grace; W H Benson
Journal:  Chemosphere       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 7.086

2.  Sources of mercury wet deposition in Eastern Ohio, USA.

Authors:  Gerald J Keeler; Matthew S Landis; Gary A Norris; Emily M Christianson; J Timothy Dvonch
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2006-10-01       Impact factor: 9.028

3.  Arsenic and mercury concentrations in major landscape components of an intensively cultivated watershed.

Authors:  C M Cooper; W B Gillespie
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 8.071

4.  Toxicity of mixtures of heavy metals and petrochemicals to Xenopus laevis.

Authors:  D de Zwart; W Slooff
Journal:  Bull Environ Contam Toxicol       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 2.151

5.  Effects of methylmercury chloride on Rana pipiens tadpoles.

Authors:  L W Chang; K R Reuhl; A W Dudley
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  1974-08       Impact factor: 6.498

6.  Dietary mercury exposure and bioaccumulation in amphibian larvae inhabiting Carolina bay wetlands.

Authors:  J M Unrine; C H Jagoe; A C Brinton; H A Brant; N T Garvin
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 8.071

7.  Mercury in feathers of little egret Egretta garzetta and night heron Nycticorax nycticorax chicks and in theirprey in the Axios Delta, Greece.

Authors:  V Goutner; R W Furness
Journal:  Arch Environ Contam Toxicol       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 2.804

8.  Contributions of global and regional sources to mercury deposition in New York State.

Authors:  Christian Seigneur; Kristen Lohman; Krish Vijayaraghavan; Run Lie Shia
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 8.071

9.  Adverse effects of ecologically relevant dietary mercury exposure in southern leopard frog (Rana sphenocephala) larvae.

Authors:  Jason M Unrine; Charles H Jagoe; William A Hopkins; Heather A Brant
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 3.742

Review 10.  Trace metal behaviour in estuarine and riverine floodplain soils and sediments: a review.

Authors:  G Du Laing; J Rinklebe; B Vandecasteele; E Meers; F M G Tack
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 7.963

View more
  1 in total

1.  Local deposition of mercury in topsoils around coal-fired power plants: is it always true?

Authors:  José Antonio Rodriguez Martin; Nikos Nanos; Theodoros Grigoratos; Gregoria Carbonell; Constantini Samara
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 4.223

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.