Advertisement

Influence of chloride ions on the reduction of mercury species in the presence of dissolved organic matter

  • Seyong Lee
  • Younghee Roh
  • Kyoung-Woong Kim
Article

Abstract

Mercuric species, Hg(II), interacts strongly with dissolved organic matter (DOM) through the oxidation, reduction, and complexation that affect the fate, bioavailability, and cycling of mercury, Hg, in aquatic environments. Despite its importance, the reactions between Hg(II) and DOM have rarely been studied in the presence of different concentrations of chloride ions (Cl) under anoxic conditions. Here, we report that the extent of Hg(II) reduction in the presence of the reduced DOM decreases with increasing Cl concentrations. The rate constants of Hg(II) reduction ranged from 0.14 to 1.73 h−1 in the presence of Cl and were lower than the rate constant (2.41 h−1) in the absence of Cl. Using a thermodynamic model, we showed that stable Hg(II)–chloride complexes were formed in the presence of Cl. We further examined that H(0) was oxidized to Hg(II) in the presence of the reduced DOM and Cl under anoxic conditions, indicating that Hg(II) reduction is inhibited by the Hg(0) oxidation. Therefore, the Hg(II) reduction by the reduced DOM can be offset due to the Hg(II)–chloride complexation and Hg(0) oxidation in chloride-rich environments. These processes can significantly influence the speciation of Hg and have an important implication for the behavior of Hg under environmentally relevant concentrations.

Keywords

Mercury Chloride ion Dissolved organic matter (DOM) Oxidation–reduction reaction Complexes 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by GIST Research Institute (GRI) grant funded by the GIST in 2018.

Supplementary material

10653_2018_121_MOESM1_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 12 kb)

References

  1. Alberts, J. J., Schindler, J. E., Miller, R. W., & Nutter, D. E. (1974). Elemental mercury evolution mediated by humic acid. Science, 184, 895–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allard, B., & Arsenie, I. (1991). Abiotic reduction of mercury by humic substances in aquatic system—An important process for the mercury cycle. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 56, 457–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amyot, M., Gill, G. A., & Morel, F. M. M. (1997). Production and loss of dissolved gaseous mercury in coastal seawater. Environmental Science and Technology, 31, 3606–3611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amyot, M., Morel, F. M. M., & Ariya, P. A. (2005). Dark oxidation of dissolved and liquid elemental mercury in aquatic environments. Environmental Science and Technology, 39, 110–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beckers, F., & Rinklebe, J. (2017). Cycling of mercury in the environment: Sources, fate, and human health implications: A review. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 47, 693–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benoit, J. M., Mason, R. P., Gilmour, C. C., & Aiken, G. R. (2001). Constants for mercury binding by dissolved organic matter isolates from the Florida Everglades. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 65, 4445–4451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bloom, N., & Fitzgerald, W. F. (1988). Determination of volatile mercury species at the picogram level by low-temperature gas chromatography with cold-vapour atomic fluorescence detection. Analytica Chimica Acta, 208, 151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cartledge, G. H. (1941). The chain carriers in Eder’s reaction. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 63, 906–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Compeau, G. C., & Bartha, R. (1985). Sulfate-reducing bacteria: Principal methylators of mercury in anoxic estuarine sediment. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 50, 498–502.Google Scholar
  10. de Magalhães, M. E. A., & Tubino, M. (1995). A possible path for mercury in biological systems: The oxidation of metallic mercury by molecular oxygen in aqueous solutions. Science of the Total Environment, 170, 229–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Drexel, R. T., Haitzer, M., Ryan, J. N., Aiken, G. R., & Nagy, K. L. (2002). Mercury(II) sorption to two florida everglades peats: Evidence for strong and weak binding and competition by dissolved organic matter released from the peat. Environmental Science and Technology, 36, 4058–4064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frohne, T., Rinklebe, J., Langer, U., Du Laing, G., Mothes, S., & Wennrich, R. (2012). Biogeochemical factors affecting mercury methylation rate in two contaminated floodplain soils. Biogeosciences, 9, 493–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gabriel, M. C., & Williamson, D. G. (2004). Principal biogeochemical factors affecting the speciation and transport of mercury through the terrestrial environment. Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 26, 421–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gu, B., Bian, Y., Miller, C. L., Dong, W., Jiang, X., & Liang, L. (2011). Mercury reduction and complexation by natural organic matter in anoxic environments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 1479–1483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haitzer, M., Aiken, G. R., & Ryan, J. N. (2002). Binding of mercury(II) to dissolved organic matter: The role of the mercury-to-DOM concentration ratio. Environmental Science and Technology, 36, 3564–3570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kappler, A., Benz, M., Schink, B., & Brune, A. (2004). Electron shuttling via humic acids in microbial iron(III) reduction in a freshwater sediment. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 47, 85–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kerin, E. J., Gilmour, C. C., Roden, E., Suzuki, M. T., Coates, J. D., & Mason, R. P. (2006). Mercury methylation by dissimilatory iron-reducing bacteria. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 72, 7919–7921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim, C. S., Rytuba, J. J., & Brown, G. E., Jr. (2004). EXAFS study of mercury(II) sorption to Fe- and Al-(hydr)oxides: II. Effects of chloride and sulfate. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 270, 9–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lalonde, J. D., Amyot, M., Kraepiel, A. M. L., & Morel, F. M. M. (2001). Photooxidation of Hg(0) in artificial and natural waters. Environmental Science and Technology, 35, 1367–1372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lalonde, J. D., Amyot, M., Orvoine, J., Morel, F. M. M., Auclair, J.-C., & Ariya, P. A. (2004). Photoinduced oxidation of Hg0(aq) in the waters from the St. Lawrence Estuary. Environmental Science & Technology, 38, 508–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lamborg, C. H., Tseng, C.-M., Fitzgerald, W. F., Balcom, P. H., & Hammerschmidt, C. R. (2003). Determination of the mercury complexation characteristics of dissolved organic matter in natural waters with “reducible Hg” titrations. Environmental Science and Technology, 37, 3316–3322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee, S., Han, S., & Gill, G. A. (2011). Estuarine mixing behavior of colloidal organic carbon and colloidal mercury in Galveston Bay, Texas. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 13, 1703–1708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lee, S., Kim, S.-J., Ju, S.-J., Pak, S.-J., Son, S.-K., Yang, J., et al. (2015). Mercury accumulation in hydrothermal vent mollusks from the southern Tonga Arc, southwestern Pacific Ocean. Chemosphere, 127, 246–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee, S., Kim, D.-H., & Kim, K.-W. (2018). The enhancement and inhibition of mercury reduction by natural organic matter in the presence of Shewanella oneidensis MR-1. Chemosphere, 194, 515–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mason, R. P., Morel, F. M. M., & Hemond, H. F. (1995). The role of microorganisms in elemental mercury formation in natural waters. In D. Porcella, J. Huckabee (Eds.), Mercury as a global pollutant (pp. 775–787). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Morel, F. M. M., & Hering, J. G. (1993). Principles and applications of aquatic chemistry. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  27. Pasakarnis, T. S., Boyanov, M. I., Kemner, K. M., Mishra, B., O’Loughlin, E. J., Parkin, G., et al. (2013). Influence of chloride and Fe(II) content on the reduction of Hg(II) by magnetite. Environmental Science and Technology, 47, 6987–6994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Qureshi, A., O’Driscoll, N. J., MacLeod, M., Neuhold, Y.-M., & Hungerbühler, K. (2010). Photoreactions of mercury in surface ocean water: Gross reaction kinetics and possible pathways. Environmental Science and Technology, 44, 644–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ratasuk, N., & Nanny, M. A. (2007). Characterization and quantification of reversible redox sites in humic substances. Environmental Science and Technology, 41, 7844–7850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ravichandran, M. (2004). Interactions between mercury and dissolved organic matter—A review. Chemosphere, 55, 319–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rich, P. R., & Bendall, D. S. (1980). The kinetics and thermodynamics of the reduction of cytochrome c by substituted p-benzoquinols in solution. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) Bioenergetics, 592, 506–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rocha, J. C., Junior, É. S., Zara, L. F., Rosa, A. H., dos Santos, A., & Burba, P. (2000). Reduction of mercury(II) by tropical river humic substances (Rio Negro)—A possible process of the mercury cycle in Brazil. Talanta, 53, 551–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schmerge, D. L. (2001). Distribution and origin of salinity in the surficial and intermediate aquifer systems, Southwestern Florida. In USGS water-resources investigations report 01-4159 (pp. 1–41).Google Scholar
  34. Scott, D. T., McKnight, D. M., Blunt-Harris, E. L., Kolesar, S. E., & Lovley, D. R. (1998). Quinone moieties act as electron acceptors in the reduction of humic substances by humics-reducing microorganisms. Environmental Science and Technology, 32, 2984–2989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Siciliano, S. D., O’Driscoll, N. J., & Lean, D. R. S. (2002). Microbial reduction and oxidation of mercury in freshwater lakes. Environmental Science and Technology, 36, 3064–3068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Skyllberg, U., Bloom, P. R., Qian, J., Lin, C.-M., & Bleam, W. F. (2006). Complexation of mercury(II) in soil organic matter: EXAFS evidence for linear two-coordination with reduced sulfur groups. Environmental Science and Technology, 40, 4174–4180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Uchimiya, M., & Stone, A. T. (2009). Reversible redox chemistry of quinones: Impact on biogeochemical cycles. Chemosphere, 77, 451–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ullrich, S. M., Tanton, T. W., & Abdrashitova, S. A. (2010). Mercury in the aquatic environment: A review of factors affecting methylation. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 31, 241–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Whalin, L. M., & Mason, R. P. (2006). A new method for the investigation of mercury redox chemistry in natural waters utilizing deflatable Teflon® bags and additions of isotopically labeled mercury. Analytica Chimica Acta, 558, 211–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wiatrowski, H. A., Das, S., Kukkadapu, R., Ilton, E. S., Barkay, T., & Yee, N. (2009). Reduction of Hg(II) to Hg(0) by magnetite. Environmental Science and Technology, 43, 5307–5313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wiatrowski, H. A., Ward, P. M., & Barkay, T. (2006). Novel reduction of mercury(II) by mercury-sensitive dissimilatory metal reducing bacteria. Environmental Science and Technology, 40, 6690–6696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yamamoto, M. (1996). Stimulation of elemental mercury oxidation in the presence of chloride ion in aquatic environments. Chemosphere, 32, 1217–1224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yamamoto, M., Hou, H., Nakamura, K., Yasutake, A., Fujisaki, T., & Nakano, A. (1995). Stimulation of elemental mercury oxidation by SH compounds. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 54, 409–413.Google Scholar
  44. Zheng, W., & Hintelmann, H. (2009). Mercury isotope fractionation during photoreduction in natural water is controlled by its Hg/DOC ratio. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 73, 6704–6715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zheng, W., Liang, L., & Gu, B. (2012). Mercury reduction and oxidation by reduced natural organic matter in anoxic environments. Environmental Science and Technology, 46, 292–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zheng, W., Lin, H., Mann, B. F., Liang, L., & Gu, B. (2013). Oxidation of dissolved elemental mercury by thiol compounds under anoxic conditions. Environmental Science and Technology, 47, 12827–12834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Environmental Assessment GroupKorea Environment Institute (KEI)SejongRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Geologic Environment DivisionKorea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM)DaejeonRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Institute for Korean Regional StudiesSeoul National UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Faculty of Environmental StudiesUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM)SerdangMalaysia
  5. 5.School of Earth Sciences and Environmental EngineeringGwangju Institute of Science and Technology (GIST)GwangjuRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations