Advertisement

Comparison of Everglades Fish Tissue Mercury Concentrations to Those for Other Fresh Waters

  • Ted LangeEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The purpose of this chapter is to provide information to resource managers about the distribution of Hg in fish within the Everglades ecosystem. To understand the causes of the variability and often elevated fish mercury levels in the Everglades and south Florida, the myriad environmental factors that influence Hg methylation and its bioavailability must be considered. The unique characteristics of the Everglades across both fresh and marine waters result in strong spatial gradients in fish Hg concentrations that vary by species that occupy different habitats and trophic regimes within the ecosystem. This chapter provides descriptions of the spatial and species distributions of Hg in fish and provides a comparison of Hg in Everglades predatory fish to level in fish from other areas of Florida and the United States.

Keywords

Largemouth bass Sport fish Non-native fish Mercury Fish consumption Spatial trends 

References

  1. Adams DH, McMichael RH Jr, Henderson GE (2003) Mercury levels in marine and estuarine fishes of Florida 1989–2001. Florida Marine Research Institute Technical Report TR-9, 2nd edn. St Petersburg, FL, p 57Google Scholar
  2. Adams DH, Tremain DM, Evans DW (2018) Large-scale assessment of mercury in sentinel estuarine fishes of the Florida Everglades and adjacent coastal ecosystems. Bull Mar Sci 94(4):1413–1427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Axelrad DM, Lange T, Gabriel MC (2011) Chapter 3B: Mercury and sulfur monitoring, research and environmental assessment for the Florida Everglades. In: 2011 Everglades Consolidated Report. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL, p 53. http://www.sfwmd.gov/sfer/. Accessed 19 Jul 2012
  4. Bodaly RA, St Louis VL, Paterson MJ, Fudge RJP, Hall BD, Rosenberg DM, Rudd JWM (1997) Bioaccumulation of mercury in the aquatic food chain in newly flooded areas. In: Sigel A, Sigel H (eds) Mercury and its effects on environment biology, Metal ions in biological systems, vol 34. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 259–287Google Scholar
  5. Cleckner LB, Garrison PJ, Hurley JP, Olson ML, Krabbenhoft DP (1998) Trophic transfer of methylmercury in the northern Florida Everglades. Biogeochemistry 40:347–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Evans DE, Crumley PH (2005) Mercury in Florida Bay fish: spatial distribution of elevated concentrations and possible linkages to Everglades restoration. Bull Mar Sci 77(3):321–345Google Scholar
  7. Farmer TM, Wright RA, DeVries DR (2010) Mercury concentration in two estuarine fish populations across a seasonal salinity gradient. Trans Am Fish Soc 139:1896–1912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. FDEP (Florida Department of Environmental Protection) (2013) Mercury TMDL for the state of Florida. Final Report. Watershed evaluation and TMDL section. Tallahassee, FL, p 104. http://www.sfwmd.gov/sfer/. Accessed 17 Apr 2014
  9. FDOH (Florida Department of Health) (2019) your guide to eating fish caught in Florida. http://www.floridahealth.gov/. Accessed 12 Feb 2019
  10. Gabriel MC, Axelrad DM, Lange T, Dirk, L (2010) Chapter 3B: Mercury and sulfur monitoring, research and environmental assessment in South Florida. In: 2010 South Florida Environmental Report. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL, p 48. http://www.sfwmd.gov/sfer/. Accessed 4 Jun 2010
  11. Gabriel MC, Howard N, Atkins S (2011) Appendix 3B-1: Annual permit compliance monitoring report for mercury in downstream receiving waters of the Everglades protection area. In: 2011 South Florida Environmental Report. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL, p 34. http://www.sfwmd.gov/sfer/. Accessed 15 Apr 2012
  12. Grieb TM, Driscoll CT, Gloss SP, Schofield CL, Bowie GL, Porcella DB (1990) Factors affecting mercury accumulation in fish in the upper Michigan peninsula. Environ Toxicol Chem 9:919–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gu B, Axelrad DM, Lange T (2012) Chapter 3B: Regional mercury and sulfur monitoring and environmental assessment. In: 2012 Everglades Consolidated Report. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL, p 42. http://www.sfwmd.gov/sfer/. Accessed 8 Feb 2012
  14. Heaton-Jones TG, Homer BI, Heaton-Jones DL, Sundlof SF (1997) Mercury distributions in American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) in Florida. J Zoo Wildlife Med 28:62–70Google Scholar
  15. Hord LJ, Jennings M, Brunnell A (1990) Crocodiles, Proceedings of the 10th Working Meeting of the Crocodile Specialist Group of the Species Survival Commission of the World Conservation Union, Gainesville, FL, 23–27 April 1990, 1:229–240Google Scholar
  16. Julian PJ, Gu B, Frydenborg R, Lange T, Wright AL, McCray JM (2014) Chapter 3B: Mercury and sulfur environmental assessment for the Everglades. In: 2014 Everglades Consolidated Report. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL, p 59. http://www.sfwmd.gov/sfer/. Accessed 31 Mar
  17. Julian PJ, Gu B, Weaver K (2018) Chapter 3B: Regional mercury and sulfur environmental assessment for the Everglades. In: 2018 Everglades Consolidated Report. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL, p 34. http://www.sfwmd.gov/sfer/. Accessed 30 Apr 2018
  18. Kannan K, Smith RG Jr, Lee RF, Windom HL, Heitmuller PT, Macauley JM, Summers JK (1998) Distribution of total mercury and methylmercury in water, sediment, and fish from South Florida estuaries. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 34:109–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Krabbenhoft DP, Sunderland EM (2013) Global change in mercury. Science 341:1457–1458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lange TR (2006) Final Report: Everglades pig frog mercury study. Report to Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Contract SP377. Prepared by Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Tallahassee, FLGoogle Scholar
  21. Lange TR, Royals HE, Connor LL (1993) Influence of water chemistry on mercury concentration in largemouth bass from Florida lakes. Trans Am Fish Soc 122:74–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lange TR, Royals HE, Connor LL (1994) Mercury accumulation in largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) in a Florida lake. Arch Environ Conam Toxicol 27:466–471Google Scholar
  23. Lange TR, Richard DA, Royals HE (1998) Trophic relationships of mercury bioaccumulation in fish from the Florida Everglades. Annual report to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Tallahassee, FLGoogle Scholar
  24. Lange TR, Richard DA, Royals HE (1999). Trophic relationships of mercury bioaccumulation in fish from the Florida Everglades. Annual report to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Tallahassee, FLGoogle Scholar
  25. Loftus WF (2000) Accumulation and fate of mercury in an Everglades aquatic food web. PhD dissertation, Florida International University, Miami, FLGoogle Scholar
  26. Naimo TJ, Wiener JG, Cope WG, Bloom NS (2000) Bioavailability of sediment associated mercury to Hexagenia mayflies in a contaminated floodplain river. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 57:1092–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ogden JC, Robertson WB Jr, Davis GE, Schmidt TW (1974) Pesticide, polychlorinated biphenyls and heavy metals in upper food chain levels, Everglades National Park and vicinity. National Park Service, Everglades National Park, Homestead, FLGoogle Scholar
  28. R Development Team (2017) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  29. Roelke M, Schultz D, Facemire C, Sundlof S, Royals H (1991) Mercury contamination in Florida panthers. Prepared by the Technical Subcommittee of the Florida Panther Interagency CommitteeGoogle Scholar
  30. Rumbold DG, Lange TR, Axelrad DM, Atkeson TD (2008) Ecological risk of methylmercury in Everglades National Park, Florida, USA. Ecotoxicology 17:632–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rumbold DG, Lange TR, Richard D, DelPizzo G, Hass N (2018) Mercury biomagnification through food webs along a salinity gradient down-estuary from a biological hotspot. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 200:116–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Scudder BC, Chasar LC, Wentz DA, Bauch NJ, Brigham ME, Moran PW, Krabbenhoft DP (2009) Mercury in fish, bed sediment, and water from streams across the United States, 1998–2005: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5109, p 74Google Scholar
  33. Snodgrass JW, Jagoe CH, Bryan AL Jr, Brant HA, Burger J (1999) Effects of trophic status and wetland morphology, hydroperiod, and water chemistry on mercury concentrations in fish. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 57:171–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Spalding MG, Forrester DJ (1991) Effects of parasitism and disease on the nesting success of colonial wading birds (Ciconiiformes) in southern Florida. Report to the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Report no. NG88-008. Tallahassee, FLGoogle Scholar
  35. Spry DJ, Wiener JG (1991) Metal Bioavailability and toxicity to fish in low-alkalinity lakes: a critical review. Environ Pollut 71:243–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stober J, Scheidt D, Jones R, Thornton K, Gandy L, Stevens D, Trexler J, Rathbun S (1998) South Florida ecosystem assessment: monitoring for ecosystem restoration. Final Technical Report – Phase I. EPA 904-R-98-002. USEPA Region 4 Science and Ecosystem Support Division and Office of Research and Development, Athens, GA, p 285 plus appendicesGoogle Scholar
  37. Stober QJ, Thornton K, Jones R, Richards J, Ivey C, Welch R, Madden M, Trexler J, Gaiser E, Scheidt D, Rathbun S (2001). South Florida ecosystem assessment: Phase I/II – Everglades stressor interactions: hydropatterns, eutrophication, habitat alteration, and mercury contamination. In: Monitoring for adaptive management: implications for ecosystem restoration. EPA 904-R-01-002, Athens, GA, p 63Google Scholar
  38. USEPA (1997) Mercury study report to Congress, vol VI: an ecological assessment for anthropogenic mercury emissions in the United States. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA-452/R-97-008Google Scholar
  39. USEPA (2001) Water quality criterion for the protection of human health: methylmercury. Washington, DC. EPA/823/R-01-001Google Scholar
  40. USEPA (2009) The national study of chemical residues in lake fish tissue. EPA-823-R-09-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  41. Ware FJ, Royals H, Lange T (1990) Mercury contamination in Florida largemouth bass. Proc Annu Conf SEAFWA 44:5-12Google Scholar
  42. Wiener JG, Knights BC, Sandheinrich MB, Jeremiason JD, Brigham ME, Engstrom DR et al (2006) Mercury in soils, lakes, and fish in Voyageurs National Park (Minnesota): importance of atmospheric deposition and ecosystem factors. Environ Sci Technol 40:6261–6268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wiener JG, Bodaly RA, Brown SS, Lucotte M, Newman MC, Porcella DB et al (2007) Monitoring and evaluating trends in methylmercury accumulation in aquatic biota. In: Harris R, Krabbenhoft DB, Mason R, Murray MW, Reash R, Saltman T (eds) Ecosystem responses to mercury contamination: indicators of change. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) North America Workshop on Mercury Monitoring and Assessment, CRC Press, New York, pp 47–87Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation CommissionEustisUSA

Personalised recommendations