Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Tracking changes in Mercury Deposition to Maryland and Understanding the impact on its Biota
Andrew Heyes and Cynthia C. Gilmour
Tony Prochaska, Michael Kashiwagi, Helen Stewart, John Sherwell, Mark Castro
Tim Rule
Mark S. Castro*,† and John Sherwell. 2016. Effectiveness of Emission Controls to Reduce the Atmospheric Concentrations of MercuryDOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b03576 Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 14000−14007
Management Questions for Regarding Mercury Deposition in the 1990’s If we reduce inorganic Hg emissions will it have an impact on mercury deposition and methylmercury concentrations in fish? How will we know if methylmercury concentrations in fish are responding to reductions in Hg emissions? What else can we do to mitigate the impact of Hg on aquatic organisms and fisheries?
Mercury Monitoring Program 2006
Approach follows: Mason et al. “Monitoring the Response to Mercury Deposition” Environ. Sci. Tech 2005 And Harris, R., Krabbenhoft, D., D. Engstrom, C. Gilmour,, J. Hurley, R. Mason et al. 2005. “Recommendations For Monitoring And Assessing Environmental Response To A Change In Mercury Loading Using Water- And Sediment- Based Indicators.” In: R.Harris, Ed. “Recommendations for Long-term Mercury Monitoring and Assessment,” SETAC publications.
Controls on deposition and transport: Deposition: Strength and proximity of sources Source type Atmospheric chemistry Transport: Landuse Geology/soil type Catchment:lake area ratio
Controls on net methylation: “Age” and complexation of Hg Basin morphometry -
• extent of shallow sediments and wetlands • surface to volume ratio
Water and sediment chemistry – • sulfate, DOC, nutrients
Temperature Drying and rewetting of soils/sediments
Controls on bioaccumulation: Food web structure
• length of food chain • benthic vs. pelagic
Water chemistry – DOC, Cl Lake stratification Transport of MeHg from sites of methylation
Deposition
Transport
Watershed retention
Deposition
Methylation
Bioaccumulation
Conceptual Diagram of the Controls on MeHg in Fish
Mercury Deposition
Only half the story as about 50 % falls as dry deposition
Precipitation
T-Hg Concentration
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
T-H
g n
g L
-1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12 MD00
MD08
MD99
Precipitation
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
cm Y
-1
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160MD00
MD08
MD99
T-Hg Deposition
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
T-H
g u
g m
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14MD00
MD08
MD99
SERC Frostburg Beltsville
Mercury Concentration in Precipitation
Mercury Deposition
Mercury Concentration
Annual T-Hg Concentration
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
T-H
g n
g L
-1
0
2
4
6
8
10
MD00
Annual T-Hg Concentration
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
T-H
g n
g L
-1
0
2
4
6
8
10
MD08
Annual T-Hg Concentration
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
T-H
g n
g L
-1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
MD99
Annual T-Hg Deposition
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
T-H
g u
g m
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
MD00
Annual T-Hg Deposition
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
T-H
g u
g m
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
MD08
Annual T-Hg Deposition
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
T-H
g u
g m
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
MD99
Mercury Deposition
SERC
Frostburg
Beltsville
Mercury in Fish
Measure Different Source Contributions to Fish Hg
Hg Isotope 3
(Wetland)
Hg Isotope 2
(Lake)
Hg Isotope 1
(Upland)
Hg added to system at 5 times current deposition rate for 5 years.
METAALICUS unpublished Under review Please do not cite or display See published paper for earlier plot
We can see this clearly because we used enriched isotope
Harris, R.C., Rudd., J.W.M., Amyot, M., Babiarz, C.L., Beaty, K.G., Blanchfield, P.J., Bodaly, R.A., Branfireun, B.A., Gilmour, C.C. Graydon, J.A., Heyes, A. Hintelmann, H., Hurley, J.P., Kelly, C.A., Krabbenhoft, D.P., Lindberg, S.E., Mason, R.P. Paterson, M.J. Podemski,C.L., Robinson, A., Sandilands, K.A., Southworth, G.R., St. Louis, V.L., Tate, M.T. 2007. Whole ecosystem study shows rapid fish mercury response to changes in mercury deposition. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 104:16586-16591. 10.1073/pnas.0704186104.
Site Latitude Longitude Map Number
Sharptown-nanticoke 38.53876 75.72741 1
Plum-Point Head of Bay 39.48696 76.11385 2
Mill Town Patuxent River 38.63302 76.69111 3
Eagle Harbor Patuxent River 38.57051 76.68219 4
Tuckahoe Lake 38.96854 75.94462 5
Piney Reservoir 39.70842 79.0018 6
Savage River Reservoir 39.54327 79.13751 7
Liberty Reservoir 39.44576 76.88376 8
Prettyboy Reservoir 39.65239 76.74183 9
Cash Lake 39.03199 76.79729 10
Lake Lariat 38.37774 76.42265 11
Deep Creek 39.55807 79.35482 12
Loch Raven 39.46250 76.57814 13
Young of the Fish Year Study
White Perch
Bass
Largemouth Bass MeanHg Concentration
Savage R
iver R
eserv
oir
Piney Rese
rvoir-
Fro
stburg
Liberty R
eserv
oir
Pretty
boy Rese
rvoir
Cash L
ake
Lake Laria
t
Tuckahoe L
ake
Deep Cre
ek
Loch R
aven
Hg (
ng g
-1 w
et
wt)
0
50
100
150
200
250
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
White Perch
Largemouth Bass
Nanticoke
Year
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Hg (
ng
g-1
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Cash Lake
Year
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Hg
(n
g g
-1)
0
50
100
150
200
250
Largemouth Bass
Fish Size
Fish Hg
Savage Reservoir
Year
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Fis
h L
eng
th (
mm
)30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Savage Reservoir
Year
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Hg
(n
g g
-1)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Controls on net methylation: “Age” and complexation of Hg Basin morphometry -
• extent of shallow sediments and wetlands • surface to volume ratio
Water and sediment chemistry – • sulfate, DOC, nutrients
Temperature Drying and rewetting of soils/sediments
Controls on bioaccumulation: Food web structure
• length of food chain • benthic vs. pelagic •Fish growth rate
Water chemistry – DOC, Cl Lake stratification Transport of MeHg from sites of methylation
Impact of Land-use
109
110
Total-Filterable-Hg concentrations in surface water of two SERC watersheds
1/1/2007 1/1/2008 1/1/2009 1/1/2010 1/1/2011 1/1/2012 1/1/2013 1/1/2014
Filt
era
ble
T-H
g n
g L
-1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14110
109
110 109
2X wet deposition?
Filterable MeHg Concentrations in Stream water 2007-2013
1/1/2007 1/1/2008 1/1/2009 1/1/2010 1/1/2011 1/1/2012 1/1/2013 1/1/2014
Filt
era
ble
MeH
g n
g L
-1
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
110
109
High nitrate Lower Hg
Respiration Denitrification Sulfate reduction
Low nitrate
High Hg
Forested
Stream
Schematic Model of Biogeochemical Processes in Riparian Zone – Hg Methylation
Carbon Pool Transformations
Timing of processes are different between the two watersheds
Agriculture
Decrease in Hg Bioavailability with reduction of DOC?
MeH
g n
g g
-1
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
T-H
g n
g g
-1
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Amphipods Isopods
109
110
109 110
SERC Stream Invertebrates 2016
Concentration and deposition decreasing slowly Watershed variables have an impact There is a couple between Hg load and Hg in biota Need to investigate dry deposition and role of forest and transit time of Hg with watersheds To my knowledge there are no studies like these being conducted elsewhere in the world!
Questions?