Literature DB >> 29515259

Mercury flux from salt marsh sediments: Insights from a comparison between 224Ra/228Th disequilibrium and core incubation methods.

Xiangming Shi1,2, Robert P Mason1, Matthew A Charette3, Nashaat M Mazrui1, Pinghe Cai2.   

Abstract

In aquatic environments, sediments are the main location of mercury methylation. Thus, accurate quantification of methylmercury (MeHg) fluxes at the sediment-water interface is vital to understanding the biogeochemical cycling of mercury, especially the toxic MeHg species, and their bioaccumulation. Traditional approaches, such as core incubations, are difficult to maintain at in-situ conditions during assays, leading to over/underestimation of benthic fluxes. Alternatively, the 224Ra/228Th disequilibrium method for tracing the transfer of dissolved substances across the sediment-water interface, has proven to be a reliable approach for quantifying benthic fluxes. In this study, the 224Ra/228Th disequilibrium and core incubation methods were compared to examine the benthic fluxes of both 224Ra and MeHg in salt marsh sediments of Barn Island, Connecticut, USA from May to August, 2016. The two methods were comparable for 224Ra but contradictory for MeHg. The radiotracer approach indicated that sediments were always the dominant source of both total mercury (THg) and MeHg. The core incubation method for MeHg produced similar results in May and August, but an opposite pattern in June and July, which suggested sediments were a sink of MeHg, contrary to the evidence of significant MeHg gradients between overlying water and porewater at the sediment-water interface. The potential reasons for such differences are discussed. Overall, we conclude that the 224Ra/228Th disequilibrium approach is preferred for estimating the benthic flux of MeHg and that sediment is indeed an important MeHg source in this marshland, and likely in other shallow coastal waters.

Entities:  

Keywords:  224Ra-228Th disequilibrium; Benthic fluxes; Core incubation; Methylmercury

Year:  2017        PMID: 29515259      PMCID: PMC5836733          DOI: 10.1016/j.gca.2017.10.033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Geochim Cosmochim Acta        ISSN: 0016-7037            Impact factor:   5.010


  15 in total

1.  Long-term investigation of atmospheric mercury contamination in Connecticut.

Authors:  F Nadim; C Perkins; S Liu; R J Carley; G E Hoag
Journal:  Chemosphere       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 7.086

2.  Marine biogeochemical cycling of mercury.

Authors:  William F Fitzgerald; Carl H Lamborg; Chad R Hammerschmidt
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 60.622

3.  Effect of bioirrigation on sediment-water exchange of methylmercury in Boston Harbor, Massachusetts.

Authors:  Janina M Benoit; David H Shull; Rebecca M Harvey; Samuel A Beal
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2009-05-15       Impact factor: 9.028

4.  Sulfate-reducing bacteria: principal methylators of mercury in anoxic estuarine sediment.

Authors:  G C Compeau; R Bartha
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1985-08       Impact factor: 4.792

5.  Methylmercury decomposition in sediments and bacterial cultures: involvement of methanogens and sulfate reducers in oxidative demethylation.

Authors:  R S Oremland; C W Culbertson; M R Winfrey
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 4.792

6.  Formation of artifact methylmercury during extraction from a sediment reference material.

Authors:  C R Hammerschmidt; W F Fitzgerald
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2001-12-15       Impact factor: 6.986

7.  Freshwater discharges drive high levels of methylmercury in Arctic marine biota.

Authors:  Amina T Schartup; Prentiss H Balcom; Anne L Soerensen; Kathleen J Gosnell; Ryan S D Calder; Robert P Mason; Elsie M Sunderland
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-09-08       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Mercury methylation in aquatic systems affected by acid deposition.

Authors:  C C Gilmour; E A Henry
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 8.071

9.  An examination of the factors influencing mercury and methylmercury particulate distributions, methylation and demethylation rates in laboratory-generated marine snow.

Authors:  Veronica L Ortiz; Robert P Mason; J Evan Ward
Journal:  Mar Chem       Date:  2015-12-20       Impact factor: 3.807

10.  Benthic and pelagic pathways of methylmercury bioaccumulation in estuarine food webs of the northeast United States.

Authors:  Celia Y Chen; Mark E Borsuk; Deenie M Bugge; Terill Hollweg; Prentiss H Balcom; Darren M Ward; Jason Williams; Robert P Mason
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  4 in total

1.  Role of Sediment Resuspension on Estuarine Suspended Particulate Mercury Dynamics.

Authors:  Emily A Seelen; Grace M Massey; Robert P Mason
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 9.028

2.  Anthropogenic mercury contamination in sediments of Krka River estuary (Croatia).

Authors:  Nuša Cukrov; Nezli Doumandji; Cédric Garnier; Ivana Tucaković; Duc Huy Dang; Dario Omanović; Neven Cukrov
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2019-12-29       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Patterns in forage fish mercury concentrations across Northeast US estuaries.

Authors:  Kate L Buckman; Robert P Mason; Emily Seelen; Vivien F Taylor; Prentiss H Balcom; Jonathan Chipman; Celia Y Chen
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2020-12-20       Impact factor: 6.498

4.  Historic contamination alters mercury sources and cycling in temperate estuaries relative to uncontaminated sites.

Authors:  Emily A Seelen; Celia Y Chen; Prentiss H Balcom; Kate L Buckman; Vivien F Taylor; Robert P Mason
Journal:  Water Res       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 11.236

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.