Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 80, Issue 1–4, pp 1105–1108

Characterization of mercury species in contaminated floodplain soils

  • M. O. Barnett
  • L. A. Harris
  • R. R. Turner
  • T. J. Henson
  • R. E. Melton
  • R. J. Stevenson
Part Xb Mercury in Soils

Abstract

The chemical form or speciation of mercury (Hg) in the floodplain soils of the East Fork Poplar Creek in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, a site contaminated from past industrial activity, was investigated. The speciation of Hg in the soils is an important factor in controlling the fate and effect of Hg at the site and in assessing human health and ecological risk. Application of three different sequential extraction speciation schemes indicated the Hg at the site was predominantly relatively insoluble mercuric sulfide or metallic Hg, though the relative proportions of each did not agree well between procedures. Application of X-ray and electron beam studies to site soils confirmed the presence of metacinnabar, a form of mercuric sulfide, the first known evidence of authigenic mercuric sulfide formation in soils.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dobb, D., Miller, E., Cardenas D., and Brown, K.: 1994.Determination of Mercury, with Speciation, in Poplar Creek Soil Samples, Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada.Google Scholar
  2. Engler, R. M. and Patrick, W. H.: 1975,Soil Sci. 119, 217–221.Google Scholar
  3. Fagerstrom, T. and Jernelov, A.: 1971,Water Res. 5, 121–122.Google Scholar
  4. Gillespie, D. C. and Scott, D. P.: 1971,J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 28, 1807–1808.Google Scholar
  5. Harris, L.H., Henson, T.J., Combs, D., Melton, R.E., Steele, R.R. and Marsh, G.C.: in press,Water, Air and Soil Pollut. Google Scholar
  6. Jackson, M.L.: 1975.Soil Chemical Analysis-Advanced Course, published by the author.Google Scholar
  7. Miller, E.L.: 1993.Speciation of Mercury in Soil, Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada.Google Scholar
  8. Revis, N. W., Osborne, T. R., Holdsworth, G. and Hadden, C.: 1989.a,Water, Air and Soil Pollut. 45, 105–113.Google Scholar
  9. Revis, N. W., Osborne, T. R., Sedgley, D. and King, A.: 1989.b,Analyst 114, 823–825.Google Scholar
  10. Rogers, R. D.: 1979,Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 43, 289–291.Google Scholar
  11. Sakamoto, H., Tomiyasu, T. and Yonehara, N.: 1992,Anal. Sci. 8, 35–39.Google Scholar
  12. Stevenson, R., Harris, L., Turner, R. and Barnett, M.: 1994. Proceedings of the Microscopy Society of America Meeting, July 31–August 4, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  13. Willet, K. L., Turner, R. R. and Beauchamp, J. J.: 1992,Haz. Waste Haz. Mater. 9, 275–288.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. O. Barnett
    • 1
  • L. A. Harris
    • 3
  • R. R. Turner
    • 1
  • T. J. Henson
    • 2
  • R. E. Melton
    • 3
  • R. J. Stevenson
    • 3
  1. 1.Environmental Sciences DivisionOak Ridge National LaboratoryK25, Oak Ridge
  2. 2.Metals and Ceramics DivisionOak Ridge National LaboratoryK25, Oak Ridge
  3. 3.Technical DivisionK25, Oak Ridge

Personalised recommendations