| Literature DB >> 30097984 |
Urszula Kwasigroch1, Magdalena Bełdowska2, Agnieszka Jędruch2, Dominka Saniewska2.
Abstract
Mercury (Hg) can be introduced into the marine environment in many different ways. In the case of the Baltic Sea, rivers and atmospheric deposition are the predominant ones. However, in the face of ongoing climate change, a new potential source, coastal erosion, is starting to become more important and is currently considered to be the third largest source of Hg in the Gdansk Basin region. It is especially significant along sections of coastline where, due to the higher frequency of extreme natural phenomena such as storms, heavy rains, and floods, increased erosion processes have already been noted. Cliffs, which account for about 20% of the Polish coastline, are particularly vulnerable. The aim of the study was to estimate the annual load of labile Hg entering the Gdansk Basin as a result of coastal erosion. Samples of down-core sediments (0-65 cm) were collected in the years 2016-2017 from selected cliffs situated in the Gulf of Gdansk area. The thermodesorption method was used to distinguish between labile and stable fractions of Hg. Considering the mean total Hg concentrations in the collected sediments (9.7 ng g-1) and the mean share of labile (64%), bioavailable mercury, it was estimated that the load of labile Hg originating from coastal erosion entering the Gdansk Basin is 10.0 kg per year. The load can increase by up to 50% in the case of episodic abrasion events during heavy storms and rains.Entities:
Keywords: Cliffs; Coastal erosion; Mercury fractionation; Mercury load
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30097984 PMCID: PMC6153678 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-018-2856-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ISSN: 0944-1344 Impact factor: 4.223
Fig. 1Location of sampling stations in the southern Baltic Sea region. a The cliff sediments (red dots). b Marine sediments (yellow dots)
Fig. 2Scheme of sediments cores collection from the colluvium and the top of the cliff
Total Hg (HgTOT) concentration and labile Hg percentage (medians and range) in (a) horizontal and (b) vertical profiles of investigated cliffs
| Layer (cm) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–20 | 20–40 | 40–65 | ||
| a) | ||||
| Orłowo | HgTOT (ng g−1) | 10.2 (9.6–12.8) | – | – |
| Hglabile (%) | 64.1 (59.2–68.4) | – | – | |
| Mechelinki | HgTOT (ng g−1) | 13.3 (11.8–13.9) | 8.9 (8.3–9.2) | 8.4 (8.1–8.5) |
| Hglabile (%) | 74.2 (72.6–76.0) | 76.3 (72.1–77.8) | 72.2 (70.8–74.1) | |
| Osłonino | HgTOT (ng g−1) | 10.5 (10.3–10.6) | 11.9 (10.6–12.3) | 8.3 (8.1–8.6) |
| Hglabile (%) | 63.2 (55.0–64.9) | 65.2 (58.1–67.3) | 60.6 (56.3–63.6) | |
| Puck | HgTOT (ng g−1) | 4.7 (3.7–5.6) | 5.1 (4.7–5.5) | 4.8 (4.4–5.4) |
| Hglabile (%) | 60.9 (58.2–69.4) | 64.1 (59.4–66.3) | 63.4 (58.2–65.2) | |
| b) | ||||
| Orłowo | HgTOT (ng g−1) | 26.9 (18.8–34.5) | – | – |
| Hglabile (%) | 86.3 (74.1–91.0) | – | – | |
| Mechelinki | HgTOT (ng g−1) | 25.4 (20.2–29.3) | 18.0 (13.1–32.0) | 19.5 (15.2–24.5) |
| Hglabile (%) | 71.4 (63.4–79.0) | 53.3 (39.1–69.1) | 57.1 (45.9–60.3) | |
| Osłonino | HgTOT (ng g−1) | 28.9 (26.0–32.1) | 17.1 (15.9–18.1) | 19.4 (14.4–24.0) |
| Hglabile (%) | 63.5 (57.6–64.2) | 53.6 (49.1–58.1) | 48.1 (44.3–51.2) | |
| Puck | HgTOT (ng g−1) | 21.6 (18.6–24.7) | 13.4 (8.7–19.4) | 7.9 (5.7–10.1) |
| Hglabile (%) | 63.2 (58.0–66.5) | 63.5 (58.6–68.8) | 60.1 (58.2–62.1) | |
Fig. 3The percentage of Hg fractions in horizontal and vertical profiles of investigated cliffs. a Puck cliff. b Oslonino cliff. c Mechelinki cliff
Fig. 4The total Hg (HgTOT) concentration and the percentage of Hg fractions in sediments collected from the cliffs and from the different types of sea bottom