Patterns and trends of fish mercury in New York State
- PDF / 2,243,337 Bytes
- 12 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 90 Downloads / 230 Views
Patterns and trends of fish mercury in New York State Geoffrey Millard 1,7 Charles Driscoll1 Mario Montesdeoca1 Yang Yang2 Mariah Taylor1 Stephen Boucher1 Amy Shaw1 Wayne Richter3,4 Eric Paul5 Colleen Parker6 Kiyoko Yokota6 ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
1234567890();,:
1234567890();,:
Accepted: 4 January 2020 © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020
Abstract In the mid-2000s a survey was conducted to evaluate fish mercury in lakes across New York State. Approximately 10 years later a second survey examining adult sportfish from 103 lakes and reservoirs was conducted to evaluate the response of fish mercury to recent declines in US mercury emissions. Of those lakes, 43 were part of the earlier survey and were examined to determine if mercury concentrations in four popular sport species, Yellow Perch, Walleye, and Small- and Largemouth Bass, declined in response to decreasing emissions. Water samples were also collected at 35 of these lakes and analyzed for mercury, methylmercury and other analytes. The Adirondack and Catskill regions remain biological mercury hotspots with elevated concentrations in fish. The most widely sampled species, Yellow Perch, showed significant increases in mercury in the Northeast and West regions of New York State over the past decade. The increases in Yellow Perch mercury is not consistent with significant reductions in water concentrations of both total and methylmercury observed corresponding in lake water samples. This discrepancy suggests watershed and in-lake processes beyond mercury emissions, such as recovery from acid deposition, impacts from climate change, or changes in food web structure may be controlling fish mercury concentrations. These results demonstrate a need for a consistent, long-term program to monitor fish mercury to inform the status of mercury contamination in New York State.
Introduction Supplementary information The online version of this article (https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10646-020-02163-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. * Geoffrey Millard [email protected] 1
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA
2
Department of Forest and Natural Resources Management, State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA
3
Division of Fish and Wildlife, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY 12233, USA
4
Department of Biology, Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866, USA
5
Division of Fish and Wildlife, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Rome, NY 13440, USA
6
Department of Biology, State University of New York College at Oneonta, Oneonta, NY 13820, USA
7
Present address: National Risk Management Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH 45244, USA
The bioaccumulation and biomagnification of mercury (Hg) is a major concern across New York State (NYS; Dittman et al. 2010) and globally. In reducing environmen
Data Loading...
