4.8 Article

Lacustrine Responses to Decreasing Wet Mercury Deposition Rates-Results from a Case Study in Northern Minnesota

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 48, Issue 11, Pages 6115-6123

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es500301a

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. MPCA
  2. USGS
  3. NPS Great Lakes Inventory and Monitoring Network under Task Agreement of the Great Lakes-Northern Forest Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit [J2105080012]
  4. Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, Environmental Protection Agency Project under Task Agreement of the Great Lakes-Northern Forest Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit [222, J2105100001, H6000082000]
  5. USGS/NPS Water Quality Partnership
  6. University of Wisconsin System Distinguished Professors Program
  7. UW-L Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present a case study comparing metrics of methylmercury (MeHg) contamination for four undeveloped lakes in Voyageurs National Park to wet atmospheric deposition of mercury (Hg), sulfate (SO4-2), and hydrogen ion (W) in northern Minnesota. Annual wet Hg, SO4-2, and H+ deposition rates at two nearby precipitation monitoring sites indicate considerable decreases from 1998 to 2012 (mean decreases of 32, 48, and 66%, respectively). Consistent with decreases in the atmospheric pollutants, epilimnetic aqueous methylmercury (MeHgaq) and mercury in small yellow perch (Hg-fish) decreased in two of four lakes (mean decreases of 46.5% and 34.5%, respectively, between 2001 and 2012). Counter to decreases in the atmospheric pollutants, MeHgaq increased by 85% in a third lake, whereas Hg-fish increased by 80%. The fourth lake had two disturbances in its watershed during the study period (forest fire; changes in shoreline inundation due to beaver activity); this lake lacked overall trends in MeHgaq and Hg-fish. The diverging responses among the study lakes exemplify the complexity of ecosystem responses to decreased loads of atmospheric pollutants.

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