| Literature DB >> 30467277 |
Hongxia Du1,2, Ming Ma3, Tao Sun4, Siwei An5, Yasuo Igarashi6,7, Dingyong Wang8.
Abstract
Mercury (Hg) deposition in the forest ecosystem is a significant source of input for methyl Hg (MeHg) and total Hg (THg) to the subtropical forest field and downstream aquatic systems. Wet deposition, litterfall, runoff, and fluxes with forest soil percolate of MeHg and THg were sampled for two years in a watershed forest of southwest China. Results showed that the depositions of THg and MeHg through litterfall and throughfall were 86 µg m-2 yr-1 and 0.8 µg m-2 yr-1 respectively, with litterfall acting as a predominant route for the input of both THg and MeHg. The estimated fluxes of THg and MeHg in the throughfall and litterfall were 3 and 4 times greater than those in the precipitation. Methylmercury in the decomposed litter migrates during its erosion by surface runoff and the concentrations of MeHg were quite consistent with that in the surface runoff. Methylmercury mainly accumulated in the lower layer of the litter and upper layer of the soil (Oi), and its transfer through the soil cross-section was delayed. THg retention was not consistent with MeHg, probably with lower soil layers (Oe and Oa) storing and enriching THg in the forest ecosystem. The forest floor of the lower soil is an effective sink for THg but not for MeHg. Methylmercury accumulated in decomposing litter and upper soil layer might transfer with soil percolate, possessing potential ecological risks for residents living around the downstream aquatic systems.Entities:
Keywords: MeHg; THg; deposition; transport; watershed forest
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30467277 PMCID: PMC6313533 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15122618
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the study site, Mt. Simian in Chongqing, China.
THg and MeHg concentrations in different layers of the forest floor.
| Layer | THg (ng·g−1) | MeHg (ng·g−1) | Density (g cm−3) | Thickness (m) | THg Content (μg·m−2) | MeHg Content (μg·m−2) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Litterfall | 73.3 ± 14.2 | 0.86 ± 0.4 | 0.38 ± 6.2 | 0.21 | 5849.3 | 8.9 | |
| Soil |
| 315.5 ± 27.3 | 1.06 ± 0.3 | 1.37 ± 2.1 | 0.20 | 9509.1 | 31.9 |
|
| 408.6 ± 42.2 | 0.61 ± 0.2 | 1.54 ± 5.9 | 0.20 | 20,106.2 | 30.1 | |
|
| 368.4 ± 22.7 | 0.26 ± 0.2 | 1.57 ± 16.6 | 0.20 | 25,449.1 | 17.9 | |
O means the upper soil with depth of 0–20 cm; O indicates soil with depth of 20–40 cm, while O means soils at the depth of 40–60 cm.
The corrected concentrations and fluxes of THg and MeHg in the throughfall, litterfall, runoff, forest-floor percolates and water during the sampling period from 2013 to 2015.
| Samples | THg Concentration | MeHg Concentration | Water/Litterfall Flux | THg Flux | Mehg Flux | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Precipitation | 10.61 ± 5.6 | 9.77 ± 8.3 | 0.13 ± 0.12 | 0.11 ± 0.13 | 1395 | 1480 | 16.19 | 18.89 | 0.18 | 0.16 |
| Throughfall | 22.14 ± 4.9 | 20.92 ± 16.2 | 0.20 ± 0. 08 | 0.19 ± 0.22 | 1073 | 1188 | 22.34 | 24.35 | 0.23 | 0.22 |
| Runoff | 20.32 ± 9.1 | 22.24 ± 19.4 | 0.31 ± 0.19 | 0.29 ± 0.18 | 861 | 884 | 19.93 | 21.66 | 0.27 | 0.26 |
| Percolate ( | 45.59 ± 12.1 | 48.29 ± 34.2 | 0.26 ± 0.12 | 0.25 ± 0.16 | 582 (834) | 602 (850) | 8.03 | 10.20 | 0.22 | 0.21 |
| Percolate ( | 55.84 ± 10.2 | 56.58 ± 28.3 | 0.21 ± 0.16 | 0.22 ± 0.14 | 584 (896) | 610 (867) | 10.54 | 11.95 | 0.15 | 0.16 |
| Percolate ( | 51.05 ± 25.5 | 55.14 ± 19.6 | 0.19 ± 0.11 | 0.17 ± 0.08 | 591 (808) | 604 (829) | 9.27 | 10.04 | 0.15 | 0.14 |
| Litterfall |
|
|
| |||||||
| 104.5 ± 23.5 | 106.3 ± 18.7 | 0.84 ± 0.12 | 0.83 ± 0.20 | 456 | 461 | 47.65 | 49.01 | 0.38 | 0.39 | |
Figure 2THg concentrations and fluxes in the precipitation and throughfall collected in the study forest stand from 2013 to 2015.
Figure 3MeHg concentrations and fluxes in the precipitation and throughfall collected in the study forest stand from 2013 to 2015.
Figure 4THg and MeHg concentrations and fluxes in the forest runoff collected in the study forest stand from 2013 to 2015.
Figure 5THg concentrations and fluxes in the soil percolates collected in the study forest stand from 2013 to 2015.
Figure 6MeHg concentrations and fluxes in the soil percolates collected in the study forest stand from 2013 to 2015.
The corrected concentrations and fluxes of THg and MeHg in the runoff, forest floor percolates and water during the sampling period from 2013 to 2015.
| Layer | THg Concentration (ng L−1) | MeHg Concentration (ng L−1) | Water/Litterfall Flux (mm) | THg Flux (μg m−2 yr−1) | MeHg Flux (μg m−2 yr−1) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013–2014 | 2014–2015 | 2013–2014 | 2014–2015 | 2013–2014 | 2014–2015 | 2013–2014 | 2014–2015 | 2013–2014 | 2014–2015 | |
| Runoff | 20.32 ± 9.1 | 22.24 ± 19.4 | 0.31 ± 0.19 | 0.29 ± 0.18 | 861 | 884 | 19.93 | 21.66 | 0.27 | 0.26 |