4.8 Article

Mercury Stable Isotopes Reveal Influence of Foraging Depth on Mercury Concentrations and Growth in Pacific Bluefin Tuna

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 52, Issue 11, Pages 6256-6264

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b06429

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. USGS Toxics Hydrology Program
  2. John & Elaine French Harvard University Center for the Environment Fellowship
  3. [OCE1634024]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pelagic ecosystems are changing due to environmental and anthropogenic forces, with uncertain consequences for the ocean's top predators. Epipelagic and mesopelagic prey resources differ in quality and quantity, but their relative contribution to predator diets has been difficult to track. We measured mercury (Hg) stable isotopes in young (<2 years old) Pacific bluefin tuna (PBFT) and their prey species to explore the influence of foraging depth on growth and methylmercury (MeHg) exposure. PBFT total Hg (THg) in muscle ranged from 0.61 to 1.93 mu g g(-1) dw (1.31 mu g g(-1) dw +/- 0.37 SD; 99% +/- 6% MeHg) and prey ranged from 0.01 to 1.76 mu g g(-1) dw (0.13 mu g g(-1) dw +/- 0.19 SD; 85% +/- 18% MeHg). A systematic decrease in prey delta Hg-202 and Delta Hg-199 with increasing depth of occurrence and discrete isotopic signatures of epipelagic prey (delta Hg-202: 0.74 to 1.49 parts per thousand; Delta Hg-199: 1.76-2.96 parts per thousand) and mesopelagic prey (delta Hg-202: 0.09 to 0.90 parts per thousand; Delta Hg-199: 0.62-1.95 parts per thousand) allowed the use of Hg isotopes to track PBFT foraging depth. An isotopic mixing model was used to estimate the dietary proportion of mesopelagic prey in PBFT, which ranged from 17% to 55%. Increased mesopelagic foraging was significantly correlated with slower growth and higher MeHg concentrations in PBFT. The slower observed growth rates suggest that prey availability and quality could reduce the production of PBFT biomass.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available