Mercury and Methylmercury Dynamics in the Hyporheic Zone of an Oregon Stream
The role of the hyporheic zone in mercury (Hg) cycling has received limited attention despite the biogeochemically active nature of this zone and, thus, its potential to influence Hg behavior in streams. An assessment of Hg geochemistry in the hyporheic zone of a coarse-grained island in the Coast Fork Willamette River in Oregon, USA, illustrates the spatially dynamic nature of this region of the stream channel for Hg mobilization and attenuation. Hyporheic flow through the island was evident from the water-table geometry and supported by hyporheic-zone chemistry distinct from that of the bounding groundwater system. Redox-indicator species changed abruptly along a transect through the hyporheic zone, indicating a biogeochemically reactive stream/hyporheic-zone continuum. Dissolved organic carbon (DOC), total Hg, and methylmercury (MeHg) concentrations increased in the upgradient portion of the hyporheic zone and decreased in the downgradient region. Total Hg (collected in 2002 and 2003) and MeHg (collected in 2003) were correlated with DOC in hyporheic-zone samples: r2 = 0.63 (total Hg-DOC, 2002), 0.73 (total Hg-DOC, 2003), and 0.94 (MeHg-DOC, 2003). Weaker Hg/DOC association in late summer 2002 than in early summer 2003 may reflect seasonal differences in DOC reactivity. Observed correlations between DOC and both total Hg and MeHg reflect the importance of DOC for Hg mobilization, transport, and fate in this hyporheic zone. Correlations with DOC provide a framework for conceptualizing and quantifying Hg and MeHg dynamics in this region of the stream channel, and provide a refined conceptual model of the role hyporheic zones may play in aquatic ecosystems.
KeywordsMercury Methylmercury Hyporheic zone Groundwater/surface water interactions Oregon Willamette River
- Bencala, K. E., Gooseff, M. N., & Kimball, B. A. (2011). Rethinking hyporheic flow and transient storage to advance understanding of stream-catchment connections. Water Resources Research, W00H03, doi:10.1029/2010WR010066.
- Benoit, J. M., Gilmour, C. C., Heyes, A., Mason, R. P., & Miller, C. L. (2003). Geochemcial and biological controls over methylmercury production and degradation in aquatic ecosystems. In Y. Chai & O. C. Braids (Eds.), Biogeochemistry of environmentally important trace elements (pp. 262–287). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. ACS Symposium Series, v. 835.Google Scholar
- Brenton R. W., & Arnett T. L. (1993). Methods of analysis by the US Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—determination of dissolved organic carbon by UV-promoted persulfate oxidation and infrared spectrometry. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 92–480.Google Scholar
- Bricker, O. P., & Garrels, R. M. (1967). Mineralogic factors in natural water equilibria. In S. D. Faust & J. V. Hunter (Eds.), Principles and applications of water chemistry (pp. 449–468). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Brigham M. E., Duris J. W., Wentz D. A., Button D. T., & Chasar L. C. (2008). Total mercury, methylmercury, and ancillary water-quality and streamflow data for selected streams in Oregon, Wisconsin, and Florida, 2002–06. U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 341.Google Scholar
- Conlon T. D., Wozniak K. C., Woodcock D., Herrera N.B ., Fisher B. J., Morgan D. S., Lee K. K., & Hinkle S. R. (2005). Ground-water hydrology of the Willamette Basin, Oregon. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5168.Google Scholar
- Creswell, J. E., Kerr, S. C., Meyer, M. H., Babiarz, C. L., Shafer, M. M., Armstrong, D. E., & Roden, E. E. (2008). Factors controlling temporal and spatial distribution of total mercury and methylmercury in hyporheic sediments of the Allequash Creek wetland, northern Wisconsin. Journal of Geophysical Research, G00C02, doi:10.1029/2008JG000742.
- DeWild J. F., Olsen M. L., & Olund S. D. (2002). Determination of methylmercury by aqueous phase ethylation, followed by gas chromatographic separation with cold vapor atomic fluorescence detection. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2001–445.Google Scholar
- Fishman M. J., & Friedman L. C. (1989). Methods for determination of inorganic substances in water and fluvial sediments. U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 5, chap. A1.Google Scholar
- Fitzgerald, W. F., & Lamborg, C. H. (2003). Geochemistry of mercury in the environment. In H. D. Holland & K. K. Turekian (Eds.), Treatise on geochemistry (Vol. 9, pp. 107–148). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
- Frank F. J. (1973). Ground water in the Eugene-Springfield area, southern Willamette Valley, Oregon. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2018Google Scholar
- Guy H. P., & Norman V. W. (1970). Field methods for measurement of fluvial sediment. U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 3, chap. C2.Google Scholar
- Lutz M. A., Brigham M. E., & Marvin-DiPasquale M. (2008). Procedures for collecting and processing streambed sediment and pore water for analysis of mercury as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008–1279.Google Scholar
- Marvin-DiPasquale, M., Lutz, M. A., Brigham, M. E., Krabbenhoft, D. P., Aiken, G. R., Orem, W. H., & Hall, B. D. (2009). Mercury cycling in stream ecosystems. 2. Benthic methylmercury production and bed sediment—pore water partitioning. Environmental Science and Technology, 43, 2726–2732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Meyer, M. (2004). Role of the hyporheic zone in methylmercury production and transport to Allequash Creek. Materials and Geoenvironment, 51, 1213.Google Scholar
- National Climatic Data Center. (2012). Summary of the day data lister. National Climatic Data Center. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?or1902. Accessed 4 Oct 2012.
- Shanley, J. B., Mast, M. A., Campbell, D. H., Aiken, G. R., Krabbenhoft, D. P., Hunt, R. J., Walker, J. F., Schuster, P. F., Chalmers, A., Aulenbach, B. T., Peters, N. E., Marvin-DiPasquale, M., Clow, D. W., & Shafer, M. M. (2008). Comparison of total mercury and methylmercury cycling at five sites using the small watershed approach. Environmental Pollution, 154, 143–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- United Nations Environment Programme. (2008). The global atmospheric mercury assessment: sources, emissions and transport. Geneva: United Nations Environment Programme Chemicals Branch.Google Scholar
- US Environmental Protection Agency. (1997). Mercury study report to Congress, volume I: Executive summary. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report EPA-452/R-97-003.Google Scholar
- US Environmental Protection Agency. (2011). 2010 biennial national listing of fish advisories. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report EPA-820-F-11-009.Google Scholar
- US Geological Survey. (1999). National field manual for the collection of water-quality data. U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A1–A9.Google Scholar
- Wentz D. A., Bonn B. A., Carpenter K. D., Hinkle S. R., Janet M. L., Rinella F. A., Uhrich M. A., Waite I. R., Laenen A., & Bencala K. E. (1998). Water quality in the Willamette Basin, Oregon, 1991–1995. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1161.Google Scholar
- Wiener, J. G., Krabbenhoft, D. P., Heinz, G. H., & Scheuhammer, A. M. (2003). Ecotoxicology of mercury, Chapter 16. In D. J. Hoffman, B. A. Rattner, G. A. Burton Jr., & J. Cairns Jr. (Eds.), Handbook of ecotoxicology (2nd ed., pp. 409–463). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar