Mercury Transport in a High-Elevation Watershed in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado
- 116 Downloads
Mercury (Hg) was measured in stream water and precipitation in the Loch Vale watershed in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado, during 2001–2002 to investigate processes controlling Hg transport in high-elevation ecosystems. Total Hg concentrations in precipitation ranged from 2.6 to 36.2 ng/L and showed a strong seasonal pattern with concentrations that were 3 to 4 times higher during summer months. Annual bulk deposition of Hg was 8.3 to 12.4 μ g/m2 and was similar to deposition rates in the Midwestern and Northeastern U.S. Total Hg concentrations in streams ranged from 0.8 to 13.5 ng/L and were highest in mid-May on the rising limb of the snowmelt hydrograph. Stream-water Hg was positively correlated with dissolved organic carbon suggesting organically complexed Hg was flushed into streams from near-surface soil horizons during the early stages of snowmelt. Methylmercury (MeHg) in stream water peaked at 0.048 ng/L just prior to peak snowmelt but was at or below detection (< 0.040 ng/L) for the remainder of the snowmelt season. Annual export of total Hg in Loch Vale streams ranged from 1.2 to 2.3 μ g/m2, which was less than 20% of wet deposition, indicating the terrestrial environment is a net sink of atmospheric Hg. Concentrations of MeHg in stream water and corresponding watershed fluxes were low, indicating low methylation rates or high demethylation rates or both.
Keywordsalpine atmospheric deposition dissolved organic carbon mercury methylmercury snowmelt subalpine watershed budget
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Baron, J.: 1992, Biogeochemistry of a subalpine ecosystem – Loch Vale Watershed, Ecological Studies Analysis and Synthesis 90, Springer Verlag, New York, 247 pp.Google Scholar
- Baron, J. and Denning, A. S.: 1993, ‘The influence of mountain meteorology on precipitation chemistry at low and high elevations of the Colorado Front Range, USA’, Atmos. Environ. 27, 2337–2349.Google Scholar
- DeWild, J. F., Olson, M. L. and 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 01–445, 14 pp., available online at http://wi.water.usgs.gov/pubs/ofr-01-445/ofr-01-445.pdf
- Fishman, M. J. and 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, Chapter A1, 545 pp.Google Scholar
- Hintelmann, H., Harris, R., Heyes, A., Hurley, J. P., Kelly, C. A., Krabbenhoft, D. P., Lindberg, S., Rudd, J. W. M., Scott, K. J. and St. Louis, V.: 2002, ‘Reactivity and mobility of new and old mercury deposition in a Boreal forest ecosystem during the first year of the METAALICUS study’, Environ. Sci. Technol. 36, 5034–5040.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hurley, J. P., Benoit, J. M., Babiarz, C. L., Shafer, M. M., Andren, A. W., Sullivan, J. R., Hammond, R. and Webb, D. A.: 1995, ‘Influences of watershed characteristics on mercury levels in Wisconsin rivers’, Environ. Sci. Technol. 29, 1867–1875.Google Scholar
- Ingersoll, G. P., Turk, J. T., Mast, M. A., Clow, D. W., Campbell, D. H. and Bailey, Z. C.: 2002, ‘Rocky mountain snowpack chemistry network – History, methods, and the importance of monitoring mountain ecosystems’, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 01–466, 14 pp.Google Scholar
- Iverfedlt, A.: 1991, ‘Mercury in forest canopy throughfall water and its relation to atmospheric deposition’, Water Air Soil Pollut. 65, 554–564.Google Scholar
- Kolka, R. K., Grigal, D. F., Verry, E. S. and Nater, E. A.: 1999a, ‘Mercury and organic carbon relationships in streams draining forested upland/peatland watersheds’, J. Environ. Qual. 28, 766–775.Google Scholar
- Lewis, M. E. and Brigham, M. E.: 2004, ‘Low-level Mercury’, in F. D. Wilde, D. B. Radtke, J. Gibs and R. T. Iwatsubo (eds.), Processing of Water Samples, U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Book 9, Chapter A5, available online at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A5/.
- Manthorne, D. J.: 2002, ‘An inventory of atmospheric mercury enrichment to alpine lakes in Colorado’, Master’s Thesis, University of Colorado, Boulder, 76 pp.Google Scholar
- National Park Service: 2002, ‘Western Airborne Contaminant Assessment Program’, National Park Service Fact Sheet, available online at http://www2.nature.nps.gov/air/Studies/air_toxics/WACAP.htm.
- Olson, M. L. and DeWild, J. F.: 1999, ‘Low-level collection techniques and species-specific analytical methods for mercury in water, sediment, and biota’, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99–4018, 11 pp.Google Scholar
- Roth, D. A.: 1994, ‘Ultra trace analysis of mercury and its distribution in some natural waters of the United States’, Ph.D. Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 309 pp.Google Scholar
- Schindler, D.: 1999, ‘From acid rain to toxic snow’, Ambio 28, 350–355.Google Scholar
- Schuster, P. F., Krabbenhoft, D. P., Naftz, D. L., Cecil, L. D., Olson, M. L., Dewild, J. F., Susong, D. D., Green, J. R. and Abbott, M. L.: 2002, ‘Atmospheric mercury deposition during the last 270 years – A glacial ice core record of natural and anthropogenic sources’, Environ. Sci. Technol. 36, 2303–2310.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shanley J. B., Schuster, P. F., Reddy, M. M., Roth, D. A., Taylor, H. E. and Aiken, G. R.: 2002, ‘Mercury on the move during snowmelt in Vermont’, Eos, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union 83, 45–48.Google Scholar
- St. Louis, V. L., Rudd, J. W. M., Kelly, C. A., Beaty, K. G., Bloom, N. S. and Flett, R. J.: 1994, ‘Importance of wetlands as sources of methylmercury to boreal forest ecosystems’, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51, 1065–1076.Google Scholar
- Susong, D. D., Abbott, M. L. and Krabbenhoft, D. P.: 1999, ‘Reconnaissance of mercury concentrations in snow from the Teton and Wasatch Ranges to assess the atmospheric deposition of mercury from an urban area’, Eos, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union 80(46), Abstract H12b-06.Google Scholar
- Swain, E. B., Engstrom, D. R., Brigham, M. E., Henning, T. A. and Brezonik, P. L.: 1992, ‘Increasing rates of atmospheric mercury deposition in Midcontinental North America’, Science 257, 784–787.Google Scholar
- United States Environmental Protection Agency: 1997, Mercury Study Report to Congress, United States Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-452-97–003, Office of Air and Radiation, Washington, D.C., 1980 pp.Google Scholar
- Watras, C. J., Morrison, K. A., Host, J. S. and Bloom, N. S.: 1995a, ‘Concentration of mercury species in relationship to other site-specific factors in the surface waters of northern Wisconsin lakes’, Limnol. Oceanogr. 40, 556–565.Google Scholar
- Watras, C. J., Morrison, K. A. and Bloom, N. S.: 1995b, ‘Mercury in remote Rocky Mountain lakes of Glacier National Park, Montana, in comparison with other temperate North American regions’, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 52, 1220–1228.Google Scholar
- Wiener, J. G., Krabbenhoft, D. P., Heinz, G. H. and Scheuhammer, A. M.: 2003, ‘Ecotoxicology of Mercury’, in D. J. Hoffman, B. A. Rattner, G. A. Burton, Jr. and J. Cairns, Jr. (eds.), Handbook of Ecotoxicology, 2nd edn, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 407–461.Google Scholar