Skip to main content
Log in

Total mercury and methylmercury dynamics in upland–peatland watersheds during snowmelt

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biogeochemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Wetlands, and peatlands in particular, are important sources of methylmercury (MeHg) to susceptible downstream ecosystems and organisms, but very little work has addressed MeHg production and export from peatland-dominated watersheds during the spring snowmelt. Through intensive sampling, hydrograph separation, and mass balance, this study investigated the total mercury (THg) and MeHg fluxes from two upland–peatland watersheds in Minnesota, USA during the 2005 spring snowmelt and proportionally attributed these fluxes to either peatland runoff or upland runoff. Between 26% and 39% of the annual THg flux and 22–23% of the annual MeHg flux occurred during the 12-days snowmelt study period, demonstrating the importance of large hydrological inputs to the annual mercury flux from these watersheds. Upland and peatland runoff were both important sources of THg in watershed export. In contrast to other research, our data show that peatland pore waters were the principal source of MeHg to watershed export during snowmelt. Thus, despite cold and mostly frozen surface conditions during the snowmelt period, peatland pore waters continued to be an important source of MeHg to downstream ecosystems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CVAFS:

Cold vapor atomic fluorescence spectroscopy

DOC:

Dissolved organic carbon

HDPE:

High density polyethylene

MeHg:

Methylmercury

MDN:

Mercury Deposition Network

MEF:

Marcell Experimental Forest

NADP:

National Atmospheric Deposition Program

Q :

Discharge

SWE:

Snow water equivalent

THg:

Total mercury

References

  • Babiarz CL, Hurley JP, Benoit JM, Shafer MM, Andren AW, Webb DA (1998) Seasonal influences on partitioning and transport of total and methylmercury in rivers from contrasting watersheds. Biogeochemistry 41:237–257. doi:10.1023/A:1005940630948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balogh SJ, Meyer ML, Hansen NC, Moncrief JF, Gupta SC (2000) Transport of mercury from a cultivated field during snowmelt. J Environ Qual 29:871–874

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop KL, Lee YH, Pattersson C, Allard B (1995) Methylmercury output from the Svartbarget catchment in northern Sweden during spring flood. Water Air Soil Pollut 80:445–454. doi:10.1007/BF01189694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom NS (1989) Determination of picogram levels of methylmercury by aqueous phase ethylation, followed by cryogenic gas chromatography with cold vapour atomic fluorescence detection. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 46:1131–1140. doi:10.1139/f89-147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom NS (1992) On the chemical form of mercury in edible fish and marine invertebrate tissue. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 49:1010–1017. doi:10.1139/f92-113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodaly RA, Rudd JWM, Fudge RJP, Kelly CA (1993) Mercury concentrations in fish related to size of remote Canadian shield lakes. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 50:980–987. doi:10.1139/f93-113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branfireun BA, Roulet NT (2002) Controls on the fate and transport of methylmercury in a boreal headwater watershed, northwestern Ontario, Canada. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 6:785–794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branfireun BA, Heyes A, Roulet NT (1996) The hydrology and methylmercury dynamics of a Precambrian Shield headwater peatland. Water Resour Res 32:1785–1794. doi:10.1029/96WR00790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branfireun BA, Hilbert D, Roulet NT (1998) Sinks and sources of methylmercury in a boreal watershed. Biogeochemistry 41:277–291. doi:10.1023/A:1005964603828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branfireun BA, Krabbenhoft DP, Hintelmann H, Hunt RJ, Hurley JP, Rudd JWM (2005) Speciation and transport of newly deposited mercury in a boreal forest wetland: a stable mercury isotope approach. Water Resour Res 41:W06016. doi:10.1029/2004WR003219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson TW, Magos L, Myers GJ (2003) The toxicology of mercury—current exposures and clinical manifestations. N Engl J Med 349:1731–1737. doi:10.1056/NEJMra022471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cory N, Buffam I, Laudon H, Kohler S, Bishop K (2006) Landscape control of aluminum in a boreal catchment during spring flood. Environ Sci Technol 40:3494–3500. doi:10.1021/es0523183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll CT, Blette V, Yan C, Schofield CL, Munson R, Holsapple J (1995) The role of dissolved organic carbon in the chemistry and bioavailability of mercury in remote Adirondack lakes. Water Air Soil Pollut 80:499–508. doi:10.1007/BF01189700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll CT, Holsapple J, Schofield CL, Munson R (1998) The chemistry and transport of mercury in a small wetland in the Adirondack region of New York, USA. Biogeochemistry 40:137–146. doi:10.1023/A:1005989229089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald WF, Engstrom DR, Mason RP, Nater EA (1998) The case for atmospheric mercury contamination in remote areas. Environ Sci Technol 32:1–7. doi:10.1021/es970284w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill GA, Fitzgerald WF (1987) Picomolar mercury measurements in seawater and other materials using stannous chloride reduction and two-stage gold amalgamation with gas phase detection. Mar Chem 20:227–243. doi:10.1016/0304-4203(87)90074-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilmour CC, Henry EA, Mitchell R (1992) Sulfate stimulation of mercury methylation in fresh-water sediments. Environ Sci Technol 26:2281–2287. doi:10.1021/es00035a029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris RC, Rudd JWM, Amyot M, Babiarz CL, Beaty KG, Blanchfield PJ et al (2007) Whole-ecosystem study shows rapid fish-mercury response to changes in mercury deposition. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:16586–16591. doi:10.1073/pnas.0704186104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horvat M, Liang L, Bloom NS (1993) Comparison of distillation with other current isolation methods for the determination of methyl mercury compounds in low level environmental samples. Part II. Water. Anal Chim Acta 282:153–168. doi:10.1016/0003-2670(93)80364-Q

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolka RK, Grigal DF, Verry ES, Nater EA (1999) Mercury and organic carbon relationships in streams draining forested upland peatland watersheds. J Environ Qual 28:766–775

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolka RK, Grigal DF, Nater EA, Verry ES (2001) Hydrologic cycling of mercury and organic carbon in a forested upland-bog watershed. Soil Sci Soc Am J 65:897–905

    Google Scholar 

  • Loseto LL, Lean DRS, Siciliano SD (2004) Snowmelt sources of methylmercury to high Arctic ecosystems. Environ Sci Technol 38:3004–3010. doi:10.1021/es035146n

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Method USEPA 1630 (2001) (Draft): Methyl mercury in water by distillation, aqueous ethylation, purge and trap, and CVAFS. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Publication no. EPA-821-R-01-020

  • Method USEPA 1631 (2002) Revision E: Mercury in water by oxidation, purge and trap, and cold vapour atomic fluorescence spectrometry for determination of mercury in aqueous samples. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Publication no. EPA-821-R-02-019

  • Mitchell CPJ, Branfireun BA, Kolka RK (2008) Spatial characteristics of net methylmercury production hot spots in peatlands. Environ Sci Technol 42:1010–1016. doi:10.1021/es0704986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols DS, Verry ES (2001) Stream flow and ground water recharge from small forested watersheds in north central Minnesota. J Hydrol (Amst) 245:89–103. doi:10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00337-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe HE, Swanson GM, Fischer LJ (1996) Human exposure to mercury: a critical assessment of the evidence of adverse health effects. J Toxicol Environ Health 49:221–270. doi:10.1080/009841096160817

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudd JWM (1995) Sources of methyl mercury to freshwater ecosystems: a review. Water Air Soil Pollut 80:697–713. doi:10.1007/BF01189722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherbatskoy T, Shanley JB, Keeler GJ (1998) Factors controlling mercury transport in an upland forested watershed. Water Air Soil Pollut 105:427–438. doi:10.1023/A:1005053509133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster PF, Shanley JB, Marvin-Dipasquale M, Reddy MM, Aiken GR, Roth DA et al (2008) Mercury and organic carbon dynamics during runoff episodes from a northeastern USA watershed. Water Air Soil Pollut 187:89–108. doi:10.1007/s11270-007-9500-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sellers P, Kelly CA, Rudd JWM (2001) Fluxes of methylmercury to the water column of a drainage lake: the relative importance of internal and external sources. Limnol Oceanogr 46:623–631

    Google Scholar 

  • St Louis VL, Rudd JWM, Kelly CA, Beaty KG, Bloom NS, Flett RJ (1994) Importance of wetlands as sources of methyl mercury to boreal forest ecosystems. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 51:1065–1076. doi:10.1139/f94-106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • St Louis VL, Rudd JWM, Kelly CA, Beaty KG, Flett RJ, Roulet NT (1996) Production and loss of methylmercury and loss of total mercury from boreal forest catchments containing different types of wetlands. Environ Sci Technol 30:2719–2729. doi:10.1021/es950856h

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmons DR, Verry ES, Burwell RE, Holt RF (1977) Nutrient transport in surface runoff and interflow from an aspen-birch forest. J Environ Qual 6:188–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urban NR, Eisenreich SJ, Grigal DF (1989) Sulfur cycling in a forested Sphagnum bog in northern Minnesota. Biogeochemistry 7:81–109. doi:10.1007/BF00004123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verry ES, Timmons DR (1982) Waterborne nutrient flow through an upland–peatland watershed in Minnesota. Ecology 63:1456–1467. doi:10.2307/1938872

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of D. Kyllander and C. Dorrance (USFS) for field assistance at the Marcell Experimental Forest, R. Bourbonniere and K. Edmundson (Environment Canada) for the analysis of dissolved organic carbon samples, and S. Wanigaratne for laboratory assistance at the University of Toronto. We gratefully acknowledge improvements made to this paper by earlier comments from D. Fitzgerald and C. Eckley. Helpful comments from two anonymous reviewers and the Associate Editor, Daniel Conley also improved this manuscript. Financial support for this project was provided through a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) Discovery Grant to B.A.B. and a NSERC Canada Graduate Scholarship to C.P.J.M.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carl P. J. Mitchell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mitchell, C.P.J., Branfireun, B.A. & Kolka, R.K. Total mercury and methylmercury dynamics in upland–peatland watersheds during snowmelt. Biogeochemistry 90, 225–241 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-008-9246-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-008-9246-z

Keywords

Navigation