Date: 26 Nov 2010
Mercury Cycling in an Urbanized Watershed: The Influence of Wind Distribution and Regional Subwatershed Geometry in Central Indiana, USA
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
The global cycle of mercury (Hg) is reasonably well-understood, as are some of the natural and anthropogenic sources of Hg to the atmosphere. Less well understood are the regional and local characteristics of Hg deposition and subsequent watershed-scale transport, important parameters for assessing human risk to various avenues of Hg exposure. This study employed a two-part strategy for understanding coupled deposition and transport processes in central Indiana (USA), including Indianapolis, a typical large city with multiple coal-fired electric utilities and other Hg emission sources. A spatial analysis of Hg concentrations in surface soils revealed elevated Hg proximal to many of the large emission sources, with a distribution aligned along a southwest-northeast axis corresponding to the mean wind direction in this region. This soil distribution suggests some local depositional impact from local utilities, with wind modification affecting the regional pattern. Post-depositional transport of Hg was assessed using a series of streambank sampling arrays as the White River and various tributaries travelled through the urban core of Indianapolis. Streambank sediments had peak Hg concentrations in the urban core, where several local sources are present and where a number of subwatersheds join the main trunk of the White River, suggesting local emission and/or rapid Hg transport from urban subwatersheds due to their relatively high proportion of impervious surfaces. High Hg values persist in White River sediments into rural areas tens of kilometers south of Indianapolis, raising concerns for anglers collecting fish in this apparently “pristine” environment.
Driscoll, C., Han, Y., Chen, C., Evers, D. L., Holsen, K., et al. (2007). Mercury contamination in forest and freshwater ecosystems in the northeastern United States. Bioscience, 57, 17–28.CrossRef
Eckley, C. S., Branfireun, B., Diamond, M., Metre, V., Pl, C., & Heitmuller, F. (2008). Atmospheric mercury accumulation and washoff processes on impervious urban surfaces. Atmospheric Environment, 42(32), 7429–7438.CrossRef
Economic Census (2008). http://www.census.gov/econ/census07. Accessed 23 Feb 2010.
Ellenhorn, M. J., Schonwald, S., Ordog, G., & Wasserberger, J. (1997). Metals and related compounds: Diagnosis and treatment of human poisoning (pp. 1589–1599). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
Evers, D. C., Han, Y., Driscoll, C. T., Kamman, N. C., Goodale, M. W., Lambert, K. F., et al. (2007). Biological mercury hotspots in the northeastern United States and toutheastern Canada. Bioscience, 57(1), 29–43.CrossRef
Foster, S., Chrostowski, P. C., & Preziosi, D. V. (2003). Comparison of two mercury environmental fate and transport models in evaluating incinerator emissions. http://www.cpfassociates.com/publications.html.
Grandjean, P. (1997). Cognitive deficit in 7-year-old children with prenatal exposure to methylmercury. Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 19(6), 417–428.CrossRef
Gray, H. H., Ault, C. H., & Keller, S. J., (1987). Bedrock geologic map of Indiana: Indiana Geological Survey. Miscellaneous Map 48.
Gray, J. E., Theodorakos, P. M., Bailey, E. A., & Turner, R. R. (2000). Distribution, speciation, and transport of mercury in stream-sediment, stream-water, and fish collected near abandoned mercury mines in Southwestern Alaska, USA. The Science of the Total Environment, 260(1–3), 21–33.CrossRef
Hatcher, C. (2009). Mercury distribution in soils and stream sediments of central Indiana, USA. MS Thesis, Indiana University.
Li, Z.-G., Feng, X., Liang, L., Tang, S.-L., Wang, S.-F., Fu, X.-W., et al. (2010). Emissions of air-borne mercury from five municipal solid waste landfills in Guiyang and Wuhan, China. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 10, 3353–3364.CrossRef
Macalady, J. L. (2000). Sediment microbial community structure and mercury methylation in mercury-polluted Clear Lake, California. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 66(4), 1479–1488.CrossRef
Mason, R. P. (1994). The biogeochemical cycling of elemental mercury: anthropogenic influences. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 58(15), 3191–3198.CrossRef
Mason, R. P., Rolfhus, K. R., & Fitzgerald, W. F. (1995). Methylated and elemental mercury cycling in surface and deep ocean waters of the North Atlantic. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 80, 665–677.CrossRef
Mastalerz, M., Hower, J. C., Drobniak, A., Mardon, S. M., & Lisa, G. (2004). From in-situ coal to fly ash: study of coal mines and power plants from Indiana. International Journal of Coal Geology, 59, 153–274.CrossRef
Neumann, K., & Bonzongo, J. C. (2005). Mercury in the Wabash River, Indiana: a preliminary assessment. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 69(10), A708.
Neumann, K., Lyons, W. B., Graham, E. Y., & Callender, E. (2005). Historical backcasting of metal concentrations in the Chattahoochee River, Georgia: population growth and environmental policy. Applied Geochemistry, 20, 2315–2324.CrossRef
Ramírez, R., Ramos, J. F. F., Angélica, R. S., & Brabo, E. S. (2003). Assessment of Hg-contamination in soils and stream sediments in the mineral district of Nambija, Ecuadorian Amazon (example of an impacted area affected by artisanal gold mining). Applied Geochemistry, 18, 371–381.CrossRef
Renzoni, A., Zino, F., & Franchi, E. (1998). Mercury levels along the food chain and risk for exposed populations. Environmental Research, 77, 68–72.CrossRef
Risch, M. R. (2007). Mercury in precipitation in Indiana, January 2001–December 2003: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5063, 76.
Rutter, A. P., Schauer, J. J., Lough, G. C., Snyder, D. C., Kolb, C. J., Von Klooster, S., et al. (2008). A comparison of speciated atmospheric mercury at an urban center and an upwind rural location. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 10(1), 102–108.CrossRef
Seigneur, C., Vijayaraghavan, K., & Lohman, P. (2004). Global source attribution for mercury deposition in the United States. Environmental Science & Technology, 38(2), 2555–2269.CrossRef
Skyllberg, U., Qian, Frech, J. W., Xia, K., & Bleam, W. (2003). Distribution of mercury, methyl mercury and organic sulphur species in soil, soil solution and stream of a boreal forest catchment. Biogeochemistry, 64(1), 53–76.CrossRef
Sloan, J. J., Dowdy, R. H., Balogh, S. J., & Nater, E. (2001). Distribution of mercury in soil and its concentration in runoff from a biosolids-amended agricultural watershed. Journal of Environmental Quality, 30, 2173–2179.CrossRef
Sorensen, J. A., Kallemeyn, L. W., & Sydor, M. (2005). Relationship between mercury accumulation in young-of-the-wear Yellow Perch and water-level fluctuations. Environmental Science & Technology, 39, 9237–43.CrossRef
Sturm, A. G. (1978). Soil survey of Marion County, Indiana: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture. Indianapolis, Soil Conservation Service 63.
Sweet, L. L., & Zelikoff, J. (2004). Toxicology and immunotoxicology of mercury: a comparative review in fish and humans. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, B(4), 161–205.
- Mercury Cycling in an Urbanized Watershed: The Influence of Wind Distribution and Regional Subwatershed Geometry in Central Indiana, USA
Water, Air, & Soil Pollution
Volume 219, Issue 1-4 , pp 251-261
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Urban geochemistry
- Airborne transport
- Power generation
- Industry Sectors