PROCEEDINGS OF 1995

CANADIAN MERCURY NETWORK WORKSHOP

VOLATILIZATION OF Hg FROM LAKES MEDIATED BY SOLAR RADIATION

M. Amyot1,2, D. R. S. Lean3, G. Mierle4 & D. J. McQueen1

1Department of Biology, York University, 4700 Keele St., North York, Ontario M3J 1P3,
2 Department of Marine Science, Texas A&M University, 5007 Avenue U, Galveston, Texas 77551, USA, 3 National Water Research Institute, Burlington, Ontario L7R 4A6, 4 Ministry of the Environment, Dorset Research Centre, P.O. Box 39, Dorset, Ontario P0A 1E0

     Elemental Hg (Hgo) plays a key role in the Hg cycle (Nriagu 1994).
     It represents nearly 98% of the atmospheric Hg and 10-50% of the
     dissolved Hg of lakes. The formation of Hgo can modify the fate of
     this element in an aquatic system in two major ways. Firstly, due to
     its low solubility and favorable Henry's Law constant, Hgo is a very
     volatile species and is the principal form of dissolved gaseous Hg
     (DGM). Thus, its formation will favor the removal of Hg from the
     system, through gas evasion. Secondly, this volatilization of Hg
     reduces the pool of reactive Hg in the water column and may thus
     limit methylHg production and accumulation in fish (Nriagu 1994).
    
     While photochemical and photobiological processes are thought to
     alter the rate of volatile Hg production in lakes (Vandal et al.
     1993; Xiao et al. in press), few field studies have directly
     addressed this topic due to technical difficulties involved in
     measuring DGM. In this context, the aim of this project is to
     determine the importance of sunlight-induced processes on DGM
     production in lakes, using ultra-clean protocols.
    
     Experiments were conducted in four temperate lakes (L. Erie, Ranger
     L., Plastic L., Fawn L.), three arctic lakes (Merreta L., North L. &
     Amituk L.) and one arctic wetland. This set of aquatic systems
     encompasses a large range of values of pH, dissolved organic carbon
     (DOC), DOC fluorescence (a measure of the photochemical activity of
     DOC) and total phosphorus (Table 1). In each case, surface water
     samples were incubated in situ for 4 to 6 h at midday in transparent
     and black Teflon bottles, and DGM levels were measured in each
     sample. Also, to narrow down the possible mechanisms involved in the
     photo-induced DGM production, we assessed the effect of UVA light
     and UVB light (transparent bottles wrapped in UV Lee Filters and
     Mylar), hydrogen peroxide spiking, Hg2+ spiking, filtration and
     sterilization on DGM production. Furthermore, we determined the
     feasibility of building light response curves of DGM production. A
     daily pattern of DGM concentrations was also obtained in surface
     waters. Depth profiles of DGM levels were measured in an attempt to
     locate the sites of maximum DGM production in different lakes.
    
     For DGM analysis, 500 mL of lake water sample was purged during 15
     min with purified argon and trapped on gold-coated sand. The Hg was
     then desorbed and measurements were made using an atomic
     fluorescence detector (Merlin).
    
     In all lakes studied, except L. Erie and Amituk L., DGM production
     was photo-induced (Fig. 1 a and b). In lakes with higher DOC levels
     (Ranger L.: 5.0 mg L-1 ; Fawn L.: 8.7 mg L-1 ), UVB light did not
     contribute significantly to this production. In lakes with lower DOC
     levels

Table 1. Chemical characteristics of study sites

LakespHDOC
(mgL-1)DOC fluorescence
(QSU)Total P
(=B5gL-1) Ranger6.1535.86 Jacks7.25.621.712 Fawn5.78.7N/A22 Erie8.32.63.38 Mouse5.74.427.17 North8.61.15.24.3 MerretaN/A2.35.26.2

     (Merreta L.: 2.3 mg L-1 ; North L.: 1.1 mg L-1 ; Plastic L.: 2.2 mg
     L-1 ), DGM photoproduction was mainly driven by UVA and UVB light.
     We suggest that in high DOC lakes, UV light is absorbed mainly by
     DOC and is thus less available for photochemical processes leading
     to Hg reduction. In contrast, in low DOC lakes, UV light can
     penetrate farther in the epilimnion and play a more active role in
     the photoreduction of Hg.

[INLINE]

     In two lakes in which sunlight-induced DGM production was described
     (Ranger L and Jacks L.), peaks of DGM levels were measured in the
     epilimnion, strongly supporting the results of the bottle
     experiments. In L. Erie, a lake in which no effect of light was
     found, no epilimnetic peaks was observed. However, a metalimnetic
     peak was found, possibly resulting from the activity of Hg-reducing
     bacteria.
    
     A number of experiments were done on Ranger L. water to narrow down
     the possible mechanisms of DGM production. Light response curves of
     DGM production were obtained by incubating transparent bottles
     wrapped in different thicknesses of screens. In Ranger L., light
     response curves reached a plateau at 45-64 fM DGM h-1 during the
     summer and at 20 fM DGM h-1 during the fall. In the two arctic
     lakes, the light response curves were linear, never reaching a
     plateau, with a maximum production < 17 fM DGM h-1 , suggesting that
     light was a limiting factor. These light response curves are the
     first ever generated for DGM production under field conditions, and
     they allowed the formulation of a mechanistic model by one of the
     authors (Mierle, in prep.), describing Hg volatilization from lakes.
     Diel patterns in DGM levels were recorded in surface waters of
     Ranger L. and will be used to validate the predictions of the model.
    
     Filtration of lake water on 1 =B5m filters prior to incubation had no
     effect on DGM production rates, suggesting that agents promoting DGM
     formation were dissolved or associated with particles & 1 =B5m, such
     as bacteria and colloids. Sterilization of the samples prior to
     incubation slightly increased DGM production rates, indicating that
     most of the DGM production is the result of photochemical processes.
    
     Spiking with different levels of Hg2+ prior to incubation resulted
     in increased DGM production in transparent bottles. The levels of
     reducible Hg are thus limiting DGM production in Ranger L. Under
     sunny conditions (June 22, 1995) approximately 27% of the added Hg
     was transformed in DGM compounds after 4 h. Under cloudy conditions
     (June 28), a time series of DGM production after spiking of 5 ng L-1
     of Hg2+ revealed that 27% of the added Hg was transformed in 12 h.
     DGM production rates thus vary from day to day, depending on the
     weather.
    
     In conclusion, sunlight-induced DGM production in the epilimnetic
     waters of many lakes, both in temperate and Arctic regions. UVB
     light contributed to the photoreduction of Hg only in lakes with
     lower levels of DOC. In Ranger L., DGM production was mainly caused
     by abiotic processes related to the dissolved and/or colloidal
     phases. In this lake, DGM production was substrate-limited, and
     reducible Hg compounds were probably the limiting substrate.

References

     Amyot, M., G. Mierle, D.R.S. Lean and D.J. McQueen. 1994.
     Sunlight-induced formation of dissolved gaseous Hg in lake waters.
     Environ. Sci. Technol. 28: 2366-2371.
    
     Barkay, T., R.R. Turner, A. VandenBrook and C. Liebert. 1991. The
     relationships of Hg(II) volatilization from a frewshwater pond to
     the abundance of mer genes in the gene pool of the indigeneous
     microbial community. Microb. Ecol. 21: 151-161.
    
     Nriagu, J.O. 1994. Mechanistic steps in the photoreduction of Hg in
     natural waters. Sci. Tot. Env. 154:1-8.
    
     Vandal, G.M., W.F. Fitzgerald, C.H. Lamborg and K.R. Rolfhus. 1993.
     The production and evasion of elemental Hg in lakes: a study of
     Pallette Lake, Northern Wisconsin, U.S.A. p.297-299. In R.J. Allan
     and J.O. Nriagu [eds.], Heavy Metals in the Environment, vol. 2, CEP
     Consultants Ltd., Edinburgh.
    
     Xiao, Z.F., D. Stromberg and O. Lindqvist. (in press) Influence of
     humic substances on photolysis of divalent Hg in aqueous solution.
     Water Air Soil Pollut.

[INLINE]
back to intro next section BACK TO

*********************************************************************