Literature DB >> 23305532

Do we understand what the mercury speciation instruments are actually measuring? Results of RAMIX.

Mae Sexauer Gustin1, Jiaoyan Huang, Matthieu B Miller, Christianna Peterson, Daniel A Jaffe, Jesse Ambrose, Brandon D Finley, Seth N Lyman, Kevin Call, Robert Talbot, Dara Feddersen, Huiting Mao, Steven E Lindberg.   

Abstract

From August 22 to September 16, 2012, atmospheric mercury (Hg) was measured from a common manifold in the field during the Reno Atmospheric Mercury Intercomparison eXperiment. Data were collected using Tekran systems, laser induced fluorescence, and evolving new methods. The latter included the University of Washington-Detector for Oxidized Mercury, the University of Houston Mercury instrument, and a filter-based system under development by the University of Nevada-Reno. Good transmission of total Hg was found for the manifold. However, despite application of standard protocols and rigorous quality control, systematic differences in operationally defined forms of Hg were measured by the sampling systems. Concentrations of reactive Hg (RM) measured with new methods were at times 2-to-3-fold higher than that measured by Tekran system. The low RM recovery by the latter can be attributed to lack of collection as the system is currently configured. Concentrations measured by all instruments were influenced by their sampling location in-the-manifold and the instrument analytical configuration. On the basis of collective assessment of the data, we hypothesize that reactions forming RM were occurring in the manifold. Results provide a new framework for improved understanding of the atmospheric chemistry of Hg.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23305532     DOI: 10.1021/es3039104

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


  7 in total

1.  Evaluation of passive sampling of gaseous mercury using different sorbing materials.

Authors:  Huiming Lin; Wei Zhang; Chunyan Deng; Yingdong Tong; Qianggong Zhang; Xuejun Wang
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Calibration Approach for Gaseous Oxidized Mercury Based on Nonthermal Plasma Oxidation of Elemental Mercury.

Authors:  Jan Gačnik; Igor Živković; Sergio Ribeiro Guevara; Jože Kotnik; Sabina Berisha; Sreekanth Vijayakumaran Nair; Andrea Jurov; Uroš Cvelbar; Milena Horvat
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 8.008

3.  The GMOS cyber(e)-infrastructure: advanced services for supporting science and policy.

Authors:  S Cinnirella; F D'Amore; M Bencardino; F Sprovieri; N Pirrone
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Mercury biogeochemical cycling: A synthesis of recent scientific advances.

Authors:  Mae Sexauer Gustin; Michael S Bank; Kevin Bishop; Katlin Bowman; Brian Branfireun; John Chételat; Chris S Eckley; Chad R Hammerschmidt; Carl Lamborg; Seth Lyman; Antonio Martínez-Cortizas; Jonas Sommar; Martin Tsz-Ki Tsui; Tong Zhang
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2020-05-23       Impact factor: 7.963

5.  Impact of Measurement Uncertainties on Receptor Modeling of Speciated Atmospheric Mercury.

Authors:  I Cheng; L Zhang; X Xu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Gaseous Elemental Mercury and Total and Leached Mercury in Building Materials from the Former Hg-Mining Area of Abbadia San Salvatore (Central Italy).

Authors:  Orlando Vaselli; Barbara Nisi; Daniele Rappuoli; Jacopo Cabassi; Franco Tassi
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2017-04-15       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Biomonitoring of Hg0, Hg2 and Particulate Hg in a Mining Context Using Tree Barks.

Authors:  Sandra Viso; Sofía Rivera; Alba Martinez-Coronado; José María Esbrí; Marta M Moreno; Pablo Higueras
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 3.390

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.