Water, Air, & Soil Pollution

, Volume 212, Issue 1–4, pp 251–273

Mercury and Methylmercury Dynamics in a Coastal Plain Watershed, New Jersey, USA

  • Julia L. Barringer
  • Melissa L. Riskin
  • Zoltan Szabo
  • Pamela A. Reilly
  • Robert Rosman
  • Jennifer L. Bonin
  • Jeffrey M. Fischer
  • Heather A. Heckathorn
Article

Abstract

The upper Great Egg Harbor River watershed in New Jersey’s Coastal Plain is urbanized but extensive freshwater wetlands are present downstream. In 2006–2007, studies to assess levels of total mercury (THg) found concentrations in unfiltered streamwater to range as high as 187 ng/L in urbanized areas. THg concentrations were <20 ng/L in streamwater in forested/wetlands areas where both THg and dissolved organic carbon concentrations tended to increase while pH and concentrations of dissolved oxygen and nitrate decreased with flushing of soils after rain. Most of the river’s flow comes from groundwater seepage; unfiltered groundwater samples contained up to 177 ng/L of THg in urban areas where there is a history of well water with THg that exceeds the drinking water standard (2,000 ng/L). THg concentrations were lower (<25 ng/L) in unfiltered groundwater from downstream wetland areas. In addition to higher THg concentrations (mostly particulate), concentrations of chloride were higher in streamwater and groundwater from urban areas than in those from downstream wetland areas. Methylmercury (MeHg) concentrations in unfiltered streamwater ranged from 0.17 ng/L at a forest/wetlands site to 2.94 ng/L at an urban site. The percentage of THg present as MeHg increased as the percentage of forest + wetlands increased, but also was high in some urban areas. MeHg was detected only in groundwater <1 m below the water/sediment interface. Atmospheric deposition is presumed to be the main source of Hg to the wetlands and also may be a source to groundwater, where wastewater inputs in urban areas are hypothesized to mobilize Hg deposited to soils.

Keywords

Mercury Methylmercury Wetlands Streamwater Groundwater Land use 

Supplementary material

11270_2010_340_MOESM1_ESM.doc (38 kb)
Table S1Map labels, sampling site names, and downstream site identification numbers (Station number, USGS database), Great Egg Harbor River (GEHR) watershed, New Jersey Coastal Plain (DOC 38 kb)
11270_2010_340_MOESM2_ESM.doc (54 kb)
Table S2Analytical methods, accuracy or precision, reporting limits for selected field parameters and constituents in unfiltered (U) and filtered (F) water samples, particulate (P) samples, and bed-sediment samples, and laboratories performing analyses (DOC 54 kb)

References

  1. Academy of Natural Sciences. (1994). Preliminary assessment of total mercury concentrations in fish from rivers, lakes, and reservoirs in New Jersey. Philadelphia, PA. Final Report 93-15F.Google Scholar
  2. BAE Systems. (2003). BAE systems ADR, Digital color infrared (CIR) orthophotography of New Jersey. Trenton: New Jersey Office of Information Technology.Google Scholar
  3. Balogh, S. J., Nollet, Y. H., & Swain, E. B. (2004). Redox chemistry in Minnesota streams during episodes of increased methylmercury discharge. Environmental Science and Technology, 38, 4921–4927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barkay, T., Gillman, M., & Turner, R. R. (1997). Effects of dissolved organic carbon and salinity on bioavailability of mercury. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 63, 4267–4271.Google Scholar
  5. Barringer, J. L., & Szabo, Z. (2006). Overview of investigations into mercury in ground water, soils, and septage, New Jersey Coastal Plain. Water Air, Soil Pollution, 175, 193–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barringer, J. L., MacLeod, C. L., & Gallagher, R. A. (1997). Mercury in ground water, soils, and sediments of the Kirkwood-Cohansey aquifer system in the New Jersey Coastal Plain U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 95-475.Google Scholar
  7. Barringer, J. L., Szabo, Z., Kauffman, L. J., Barringer, T. H., Stackelberg, P. E., Ivahnenko, T., et al. (2005). Mercury concentrations in water from an unconfined aquifer system, New Jersey Coastal Plain. Science of the Total Environment, 346, 169–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barringer, J. L., Szabo, Z., Schneider, D., Atkinson, W. D., & Gallagher, R. A. (2006). Mercury in ground water, septage, leach-field effluent, and soils in residential areas, New Jersey coastal plain. Science of the Total Environment, 361, 144–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barrow, N. J., & Cox, V. C. (1992). The effects of pH and chloride concentration on mercury sorption. I. By goethite. Journal of Soil Science, 43, 295–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Belt, K., Kaushal, S, Swan, C, Pouyat, R., & Groffman, P. (2008). The urban stream continuum: The effects of upland riparian zones and engineered “urban karst” on organic matter, contaminant fluxes and lotic ecology. National Water Quality Monitoring Council, 6th National Monitoring Conference, May 2008, Atlantic City NJ (abstract).Google Scholar
  11. Brumbaugh, W. G., Krabbenhoft, D. P., Helsel, D. R., Wiener, J. G., & Echols, K. R. (2001). A national pilot study of mercury contamination of aquatic ecosystems along multiple gradients: Bioaccumulation in fish. U.S. Geological Survey Biological Science Report USGS/BRD/BSR-2001-0009.Google Scholar
  12. Cai, Y., Jaffé, R., & Jones, R. D. (1999). Interactions between dissolved organic carbon and mercury species in surface waters of the Florida Everglades. Applied Geochemistry, 14, 395–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dillon, P. J., & Molot, L. A. (1997). Effect of landscape form on export of organic carbon, iron, and phosphorus from forested stream catchments. Water Resources Research, 33, 2591–2600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Driscoll, C. T., Holsapple, J., Schofield, C. L., & Munson, R. (1998). The chemistry and transport of mercury in a small wetland in the Adirondack region of New York, USA. Biogeochemistry, 40, 137–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eisenreich, S. J., Franz, T., Gao, Y., Brunciak, P. & Lavorgna, C. (1998). Atmospheric deposition assessment-New Jersey—Organic compounds, trace metals, Hg, and nutrients. Cook College, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ unpublished report to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, on file at NJDEP, Trenton, NJ.Google Scholar
  16. Engstrom, D. R., & Swain, E. B. (1997). Recent declines in atmospheric deposition in the upper Midwest. Environmental Science and Technology, 31, 960–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Feick, G., Horne, R. A., & Yeaple, D. (1972). Release of mercury from contaminated freshwater sediments by the runoff of road deicing salt. Science, 175, 1142–1143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fitzgerald, W. F., Engstrom, D. R., Mason, R. P., & Nater, E. A. (1998). The case for atmospheric mercury contamination in remote areas. Environmental Science and Technology, 32, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fulkerson, M., Nnadi, F. N., & Chasar, L. S. (2007). Characterizing dry deposition of mercury in urban runoff. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 185, 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fusillo, T. V. (1981). Impact of suburban residential development on water resources in the area of Winslow Township, Camden County, New Jersey. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 81–27.Google Scholar
  21. 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
  22. Gavis, J., & Ferguson, J. F. (1972). The cycling of mercury through the environment. Water Research, 6, 989–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Grassi, S., & Netti, R. (2000). Sea water intrusion and mercury pollution of some coastal aquifers in the province of Grosseto (Southern Tuscany—Italy). Journal of Hydrology, 237, 198–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haitzer, M., Aiken, G. R., & Ryan, J. N. (2003). Binding of mercury (II) to aquatic humic substances: Influence of pH and source of humic substances. Environmental Science and Technology, 37, 2436–2441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Horowitz, A. J., Demas, C. R., Fitzgerald, K. K., Miller, T. L. & Rickert, D. A. (1994). U.S. Geological Survey protocol for the collection and processing of surface-water samples for the subsequent determination of inorganic constituents in filtered water. U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 94-0539, 57 pGoogle Scholar
  26. Hurley, J. P., Benoit, J. M., Babiarz, C. L., Shafer, M. M., Andren, A. W., Sullivan, J. R., et al. (1995). Influences of watershed characteristics on mercury levels in Wisconsin rivers. Environmental Science and Technology, 29, 1867–1875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hurley, J. P., Cowell, S. E., Shafer, M. M., & Hughes, P. E. (1998). Tributary loading of mercury to Lake Michigan: Importance of seasonal events and phase partitioning. The Science of the Total Environment, 213, 129–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kauffman, L. J., Baehr, A. L., Ayers, M. A., & Stackelberg, P. E. (2001). Effects of land use and travel time on the distribution of nitrate in the Kirkwood-Cohansey aquifer system in southern New Jersey. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4117.Google Scholar
  29. 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
  30. Kolka, R. K., Grigal, D. F., Nater, E. A., & Verry, E. S. (1999a). Mercury and organic carbon relationships in streams draining forested upland/peatland watersheds. Journal of Environmental Quality, 28, 766–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kolka, R. K., Nater, E. A., Grigal, D. F., & Verry, E. S. (1999b). Atmospheric inputs of mercury and organic carbon into a forested upland/bog watershed. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 113, 273–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Koterba, M. T., Andres, A. S., Vrabel, J., Crilley, D. M., Szabo, Z., DeWild, J. T., et al. (2006). Occurrence and distribution of mercury in the surficial aquifer, Long Neck peninsula, Sussex County, Delaware, 2003-04. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5011.Google Scholar
  33. Krabbenhoft, D. P., Benoit, J. M., Babiarz, C. L., Hurley, J. P., & Andren, A. W. (1995). Mercury cycling in the Allequash Creek watershed, northern Wisconsin. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 80, 425–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lee, J. M., & Kim, G. (2006). A simple and rapid method for analyzing radon in coastal and ground waters using a radon-in-air monitor. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 89, 219–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lewis, M. E., & Brigham, M. E. (2004). Low-level mercury. In F. D. Wilde, D. B. Radke, J. Gibs, & R. T. Iwatsubo (Eds.), Processing of water samples. U.S. Geological survey techniques of water-resource investigations, Book 9, Chapter A5. Reston: U.S. Geological Survey.Google Scholar
  36. Lindqvist, O., Johansson, K., Aastrup, M., Andersson, A., Bringmark, L., Hovsenius, G., et al. (1991). Mercury in the Swedish environment—Recent research on causes, consequences and corrective methods. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 55, 1–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lyons, W. B., Fitzgibbon, T. O., Welch, K. A., & Carey, A. E. (2006). Mercury geochemistry of the Scioto River, Ohio: Impact of agriculture and urbanization. Applied Geochemistry, 21, 1880–1888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Marvin-DiPasquale, M., Agee, J., McGowan, C., Oremland, R. S., Thomas, M., Krabbenhoft, D., et al. (2000). Methyl-mercury degradation pathways: A comparison among three mercury-impacted ecosystems. Environmental Science and Technology, 34, 4908–4916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mason, R. P., & Sullivan, K. A. (1998). Mercury and methylmercury transport through an urban watershed. Water Research, 32, 321–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mierle, G., & Ingram, R. (1991). The role of humic substances in the mobilization of mercury from watersheds. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 56, 349–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Modica, E., Buxton, H. T., & Plummer, L. N. (1998). Evaluating the source area and residence times of ground-water seepage to streams, New Jersey Coastal Plain. Water Resources Research, 34, 2797–2810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Murphy, E., Dooley, J., Windom, H. L., & Smith, R. G., Jr. (1994). Mercury species in potable ground water in southern New Jersey. Water, Air, Soil Pollution, 78, 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. NJDEP. (2007). Land use/land cover update, Great Egg Harbor Watershed Management Area WMA-15, vector digital data. Trenton: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Information Resources Management, Bureau of Geographic Information Systems.Google Scholar
  44. NJDEP. (2008). Surface water quality standards. N.J.A.C:7:9B, June 16, 2008. www.state.nj.us/dep/wms/bwqsa/docs/0608_SWQS.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2009
  45. Nriagu, J. O., & Pacyna, J. M. (1988). Quantitative assessment of worldwide contamination of air, water and soils by trace metals. Nature, 333, 134–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Olson, M. L., & DeWild, J. F. (1999). Techniques for the collection and specific analysis of low levels of mercury in water, sediment, and biota. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 99-4018B.Google Scholar
  47. Parkhurst, D. L., & Appelo, C. A. J. (1999). User’s guide to PHREEQC (version 2)—A computer program for speciation, batch reaction, one-dimensional transport, and inverse geochemical calculations. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 99-4259.Google Scholar
  48. Rantz, S. E., & others. (1982). Measurement and computation of streamflow: Volume 1, measurement of stage and discharge. U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2175.Google Scholar
  49. Ravichandran, M. (2004). Interactions between mercury and dissolved organic matter—A review. Chemosphere, 319, 319–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ravichandran, M., Aiken, G. R., Ryan, J. N., & Reddy, M. M. (1999). Inhibition of precipitation and aggregation of metacinnabar (mercuric sulfide) by dissolved organic matter isolated from the Florida Everglades. Environmental Science and Technology, 33, 1418–1423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ryan, J. N., & Gschwend, P. M. (1994). Effect of solution chemistry on clay colloid release from an iron oxide-coated aquifer sand. Environmental Science and Technology, 28, 1717–1726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schuster, P. F., Shanley, J. B., Marvin-DiPasquale, M., Reddy, M. M., Aiken, G. R., Roth, D. A., et al. (2008). Mercury and organic carbon dynamics during runoff episodes from a northeastern USA Watershed. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 187, 89–108. doi:10.1007/s11270-007-9500-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Selvendiran, P., Driscoll, C. T., Bushey, J. T., & Montesdeoca, M. R. (2008). Wetland influence on mercury fate and transport in a temperate forested watershed. Environmental Pollution, 154, 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Shanley, J. B., Mast, M. A., Campbell, D. H., Aiken, G. R., Krabbenhoft, D. P., Hunt, R. J., et al. (2008). Comparison of total mercury and methylmercury cycling at five sites using the small watershed approach. Environmental Pollution, 154, 143–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Skyllberg, U., Xia, K., Bloom, P. R., Nater, E. A., & Bleam, W. F. (2000). Binding of mercury (II) to reduced sulfur in soil organic matter along upland-peat soil transects. Journal of Environmental Quality, 29, 855–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sorenson, J. A., Glass, G. E., & Schmidt, K. W. (1994). Regional patterns of wet mercury deposition. Environmental Science and Technology, 28, 2025–2032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Szabo, Z., Rice, D. E., Plummer, L. N., Busenberg, E., Drenkard, S., & Schlosser, P. (1996). Age dating of shallow ground water with chlorofluorocarbons, tritium/helium 3, and flow path analysis, southern New Jersey Coastal Plain. Water Resources Research, 32, 1023–1038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Szabo, Z., Zapecza, O. S., Oden, J. H., & Rice, D. E. (2005a). Radiochemical sampling and analysis of shallow ground water and sediment at the BOMARC Missile Facility, east-central New Jersey, 1999–2000: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5062, 87 p. [http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/pubs/sir/sir20055062]
  59. Szabo, Z., dePaul, V. T., Kraemer, T. F., & Parsa, B. (2005b). Occurrence of radium-224 and comparison to that of radium-226 and radium-228 in water from the unconfined Kirkwood-Cohansey aquifer system, southern New Jersey. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5224.Google Scholar
  60. Taggart, J. E. (2002). (Ed.), Analytical methods for chemical analysis of geologic and other materials, U.S. Geological Survey. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-223.Google Scholar
  61. Urban, N. R., Bayley, S. E., & Eisenreich, S. J. (1989). Export of dissolved organic carbon and acidity from peatlands. Water Resources Research, 25, 1619–1628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. USEPA. (2001). Water quality criterion for the protection of human health: Methylmercury. Washington, D.D., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-823-R-01-001.Google Scholar
  63. Watras, C. J., Morrison, K. A., Hudson, R. J. M., Frost, T. M., & Kratz, T. K. (2000). Decreasing mercury in northern Wisconsin: Temporal patterns in bulk precipitation and a precipitation-dominated lake. Environmental Science and Technology, 34, 4051–4057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Watt, M. K. (2000). A hydrologic primer for New Jersey watershed management. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4140.Google Scholar
  65. Watt, M. K. & Johnson, M. L. (1992). Water resources of the unconfined aquifer system of the Great Egg Harbor Basin, New Jersey 1989-90. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 91-4126.Google Scholar
  66. Wilde, F. D., Radtke, D. B., Gibs, Jacob, & Iwatsubo, R. T. (2004). Processing of water samples (version 2.1). U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A5, accessed 03/05 /08 at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A5/.
  67. Wu, F., Cai, Y., Evans, D., & Dillon, P. (2004). Complexation between Hg (II) and dissolved organic matter in stream waters: An application of fluorescence spectroscopy. Biogeochemistry, 71, 339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© US Government 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julia L. Barringer
    • 1
  • Melissa L. Riskin
    • 1
  • Zoltan Szabo
    • 1
  • Pamela A. Reilly
    • 1
  • Robert Rosman
    • 1
  • Jennifer L. Bonin
    • 1
  • Jeffrey M. Fischer
    • 1
  • Heather A. Heckathorn
    • 1
  1. 1.U.S. Geological SurveyWest TrentonUSA

Personalised recommendations