Deposition and Fate of Mercury in Forests of the Adirondacks - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Deposition and Fate of Mercury in Forests of the Adirondacks

Bradley D. Blackwell and Charles T. Driscoll Syracuse University

Mercury Cycle

Vijayaraghavan et al. 2007

Deposition

• Wet deposition occurs

through precipitation

• Throughfall enrichment
• Dry deposition includes

particulates and gaseous Hg

• Uptake by foliage
• Variable across

landscape

Adirondack Park

• Largest park in the

continental U.S.

• Important conservation and

recreation area

• Receives mercury

deposition from local, regional, and global sources

• Biological mercury

“hotspot”

• Park-wide fish mercury

advisory plus 55 individual water body advisories

Mercury Deposition in Adirondack Park

• Historical yearly deposition 5 µg/m2; current

estimates 9 µg/m2 (Lorey and Driscoll 1999)

• Regional Sources

– Ohio Valley, Pennsylvania, Texas

• Global Sources

– Up to 20% from Asia (Seigneur et al. 2003)

Choi et al. 2008

Research Overview

• Phase 1: Compare mercury

cycling dynamics in hardwood and conifer forests (Huntington Forest)

• Phase 2: Examine mercury

deposition along an elevation gradient (Whiteface Mountain)

• Phase 3: Conduct spatial analysis
• f mercury in foliage and soil

across Adirondack Park (50 sites)

Wet Deposition – Huntington Forest

Hg (ng/L)

5 10 15 20 25 MDN Hardwood Conifer

Wet Deposition – Whiteface Mountain

Hg (ng/L)

2 4 6 8 10 Hardwood Spruce/Fir Alpine Cloudwater

Wet Deposition – Whiteface Mountain

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 5 10 15 20 25

DOC (ppm) Hg (ng/L)

Hardwood Spruce/Fir Alpine

Foliar Mercury - 2010

American Beech

R2 = 0.9604 5 10 15 20 25 30 50 100 150 Days Hg (ng/g)

Sugar Maple

R2 = 0.9285 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 50 100 150 Days Hg (ng/g)

Yellow Birch

R2 = 0.9411 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 50 100 150 Days Hg (ng/g)

White Pine

5 10 15 20 25 30 50 100 150 Days Hg (ng/g) Age 1 Age 2

Spatial Survey - Latitude

South North

Spatial Survey - Longitude

West East

Spatial Survey - Elevation

Foliar Mercury Elevation Patterns (Paper Birch)

Elevation (m) 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Hg (ng/ g) 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 2009 (R2=0.4358) 2010 (R2=0.0168)

Deposition Totals – Whiteface Mountain

Hardwood S pruce/ Fir Alpine

Hg Deposition (ug/ m2/ year)

10 20 30 40 Throughfall Lit t er Cloudwat er

Foliar – Soil Mercury

Dominant Species

Beech Maple Pine Spruce Fir

Hg (ng/g dw)

10 20 30 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Foliage Oi/Oe Oa

Soil Profiles – Huntington Forest

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

50 100 150

Hg (ng/g)

Conifer Hardwood

Oa Bh Bs1 Bs2 Bs3 C

Soil Patterns

R² = 0.4457

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Hg (ng/g) Elevation

Organic Soil Mercury

Spatial Survey - Elevation

Conclusions

• Deposition pathways contribute mercury

differently among different forest types

• Mercury accumulates and concentrates in
• rganic soil layers
• Latitude, longitude, and elevation all have

significant effects on foliar and soil mercury concentrations in Adirondack Park

Future Plans

• Publish data presented
• Develop model and map
• f atmospheric

deposition in Adirondack Park

• Create GIS layer of

mercury deposition that will be available to researchers and managers

Acknowledgements

• Clarkson University
• DEC
• Eric Hebert
• West Virginia University,

Wisconsin