Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 55, Issue 3–4, pp 283–294 | Cite as

Mercury dispersal in water, sediments and aquatic biota of a gold mining tailing deposit drainage in pocone, Brazil

  • L. D. Lacerda
  • W. C. Pfeiffer
  • R. V. Marins
  • S. Rodrigues
  • C. M. M. Souza
  • W. R. Bastos
Article

Abstract

In the Pocone district, Brazil, Hg distribution was studied in a small watershed which drains tailings from a 10 yr old gold mining operation. Heavy regional rains are responsible for continuous weathering, thereby making it possible to transport Hg into the ecologically important Pantanal area. Mercury concentrations in creek sediments range from < 0.02 to 0.18 mg. kg−1. The highest concentrations occur close to the tailings deposit. Mercury concentrations in the water were always below the detection limit of the analytical method used (<0.04 µg. L−1). Suspended matter samples collected before, during and after a storm, showed a Hg peak value of 0.61 mg kg−1. about 30 min after the event. Dissolved Hg concentration still fell below the detection limit. Among the biota, molluscs accumulated moderately high concentrations of Hg, while macrophytes and fish did not. Mercury concentrations in molluscs were dependent on size, with larger animals presenting higher Hg concentration. We conclude that Hg present in the tailings shows low mobility and that its eventual transport into the drainage system is dependent on the erosion of fine material from the wastes during rains, resulting in a restricted contamination of the area and low Hg concentration in the biota.

Keywords

Macrophyte Gold Mining Mercury Concentration Aquatic Biota Small Watershed 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agemian, H. and Chan, V.: 1978, An. Chim. Acta 101, 193.Google Scholar
  2. Andren, A. W. and Nriagu, J. O.: 1979, ‘The Global Cycle of Mercury’, in Nriagu, J. O. (ed.), The Biogeochemistry of Mercury in the Environment, Elsevier/North Holland Publ. Co., Amsterdam, pp. 1–19.Google Scholar
  3. CETEM: 1989, Relatorio Anual do Projeto Pocone, Centro de Tecnologia Mineral, CNPq, Rio de Janeiro, 93 p.Google Scholar
  4. Cunningan, P. A. and Tripp, M. R.: 1975, Mar. Biol. 31, 321.Google Scholar
  5. Davies, I. M.; Graham, W. C., and Pirie, J. M.: 1979, Marine Chem. 7, 111.Google Scholar
  6. Evans, R. D.: 1986, Arch. Environm. Contamin. Toxicol. 15, 505.Google Scholar
  7. Fernandes, A., Guimaraes, M., Bidone, E. D., Lacerda, L. D., and Pfeiffer, W. C.: 1990, ‘Contaminacao por mercurio na regiao do Projeto Carajas, Para’, in Riscos e Consequencias do Uso do Mercurio. Org, Panamer. Sande. Brasilia, DR (in press).Google Scholar
  8. Fowler, S. W., Heyreaud, M., and La Rosa, J.: 1978, Mar. Biol. 46, 267.Google Scholar
  9. Hinton, E. R., Rowlins, L. K., and Flanagan, E. B.: 1987, Environm. Sci. Technol. 21, 198.Google Scholar
  10. Lacerda, L. D., Pfeiffer, W. C., Silveira, E. G., Bastos, W. R., and Souza, C. M. M.: 1987, An. I Congr. Brasil. Geoquimica. 2, 295.Google Scholar
  11. Lacerda, L. D., Pfeiffer, W. C., Ott, A. T., and Silveira, E. G.: 1989, Biotropica 21, 91.Google Scholar
  12. Lacerda, L. D., Pfeiffer, W. C., Silveira, E. G., and Souza, C. M. M.: 1990. Acta Limnol Bras. 3, 978–989.Google Scholar
  13. Lane, P. A., Crowell, M. J., and Graves, M. C.: 1988, Canmet Spec. Publ. SP88-23,3.Google Scholar
  14. Lindqvist, O., Jernelov, A. Johansson, K., and Rodhe, H.: 1984, Mercury in the Swedish Environment. Global and Local Sources. Natl. Swedish Environ. Protection Board PReport, Solna, 105 p.Google Scholar
  15. Malm, O., Pfeiffer, W. C., Bastos, W. R., and Souza, C. M. M.: 1989, Cien. Cult. 41, 88.Google Scholar
  16. Martinelli, L. A., Ferreira, J. R., Forsberg, B. R., and Victoria, R. L.: 1988, Ambio 17, 252.Google Scholar
  17. Mohlenberg, F. and Riisgard, H. U.: 1988, Environm. Pollut. 55, 137.Google Scholar
  18. Mudroch, A. and Clair, T. A.: 1986, Sci. Total Environ. 57, 205.Google Scholar
  19. Nriagu, J. O.: 1979, The Biogeochemistry of Mercury in the Environment, Elsevier, North Holland Biochemical Press, Amsterdam, 696 p.Google Scholar
  20. Pfeiffer, W. C. and Lacerda,L. D.: 1988, Environ. Technol Lett. 9, 325.Google Scholar
  21. Pfeiffer, W. C., Lacerda, L. D., Malm, O., Souza, C. M. M., Silveira, E. G., and Bastos, W. R.: 1989a, Sci. Total Environ 87/88, 233.Google Scholar
  22. Pfeiffer, W C., Malm, O., Souza, C. M. M., Bastos, W. R., and Torres, J. P.: 1989b, Proc. 7th, Inter. Conf. Heavy Metals in the Environment, Geneve, 1, 222.Google Scholar
  23. Riisgard, H. U. and Famme, P.: 1986, Mar. Pollut. Bull. 17, 255.Google Scholar
  24. Riisgarg, H. U. and Fame, P.: 1988, Toxicol Environm. Chem. 16, 219.Google Scholar
  25. Salomons, W. and Forstner, U.: 1984, Metals in the Hydrocycle, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 397 p.Google Scholar
  26. Siegel, S. M., Siegel, B. Z., Lipp, C., Kruckeberg, A., Towers, G. H. N., and Warren, H.: 1985, Water, Air, and Soil Pollut. 25, 73.Google Scholar
  27. Siegel, S. M., Siegel, B. Z., Barghigiani, C., Aratani, K., Penny, P., and Penny, D.: 1987, Water, Air, and Soil Pollut.. 33, 65.Google Scholar
  28. Silva, C. J. and Silva-Pinto, V.: 1989, Rev. Brasil Biol. 49, 691.Google Scholar
  29. Slavin, S., Barnett, W. and Crassweller, P. O.: 1972, Atomic Absorption Newslett. 1, 37.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. D. Lacerda
    • 1
    • 2
  • W. C. Pfeiffer
    • 3
  • R. V. Marins
    • 4
  • S. Rodrigues
    • 4
  • C. M. M. Souza
    • 3
  • W. R. Bastos
    • 3
  1. 1.Departamento de GeoquimicaUniversidade Federal FluminenseRio de JaneiroBrazil
  2. 2.Centro de Tecnologia Mineral (CETEM)Rio de JaneiroBrazil
  3. 3.Instituto de Biofisica Carlos Chagas FilhoUniversidade Federal do Rio de JaneiroBrazil
  4. 4.Centro de Tecnologia Mineral (CETEM)Ilha do FundaoRio de Janeiro

Personalised recommendations