, Volume 85, Issue 2, pp 119–123 | Cite as

Atmospheric mercury pollution due to losses of terrestrial carbon pools?

  • Daniel Obrist
Original Paper


Plants accumulate significant amounts of atmospheric mercury (Hg) in aboveground biomass, likely sequestering over 1,000 Mg of atmospheric Hg every year. This large mercury uptake could be strong enough to affect tropospheric Hg levels and might be partially responsible for seasonal variations in atmospheric Hg observed at Mace Head, Ireland. The fluctuations of Hg concentrations coincide temporally with the annual oscillation of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Northern Hemisphere, which is a result of seasonal growth of vegetation. Therefore, declining Hg concentrations in spring and summer may be attributed in part to plant uptake of atmospheric Hg. Further, the increase of Hg concentrations during non-active vegetation periods might partially be due to plant-derived Hg emitting back to the atmosphere during carbon mineralization. The implications of these propositions are that past and future changes in biomass productivity and organic carbon pools may have had—and may continue to have—significant effects on atmospheric Hg levels. Specifically, large losses in soil and biomass carbon pools in the last 150 years could have contributed significantly to observed increases in atmospheric Hg pollution. The roles of vegetation and terrestrial carbon pools should receive detailed consideration on how they might attenuate or exacerbate atmospheric Hg pollution.


Atmospheric mercury Plant mercury uptake Carbon mineralization Mercury sequestration Seasonality 



I would like to thank Jay Arnone, Harald Biester, Christophe Ferrari, Dale Johnson, Hans Moosmüller, and two anonymous reviewers for valuable inputs and editorial comments to this manuscript. This research was in part supported by the National Science Foundation (ATM 0632780) and by the Desert Research Institute.


  1. Artaxo P, Calixto de Campos R, Fernandes ET et al (2000) Large scale mercury and trace element measurements in the Amazon basin. Atmos Environ 34:4085–4096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker PGL, Brunke E-G, Slemr F et al (2003) Atmospheric mercury measurements at Cape Point, South Africa. Atmos Environ 36:2459–2465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banic CM, Beauchamp ST, Tordon RJ et al (2003) Vertical distribution of gaseous elemental mercury in Canada. J Geophys Res 108(D9): 4264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beauford W, Barber J, Barringer AR (1977) Uptake and distribution of mercury within higher plants. Physiol Plant 39:261–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Biester H, Martinez-Cortizas A, Birkenstock S et al (2003) Effect of peat decomposition and mass loss on historic mercury records in peat bogs from Patagonia. Environ Sci Technol 37:32–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bishop KH, Lee Y-H, Munthe J et al (1998) Xylem sap as a pathway for total mercury and methylmercury transport form soil to tree canopy in the boreal forest. Biogeochem 40:101–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ebinghaus R, Kock HH, Coggins AM et al (2002) Long-term measurements of atmospheric mercury at Mace Head, Irish west coast, between 1995 and 2001. Atmos Environ 36:5267–5276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ericksen JA, Gustin MS, Schorran DE et al (2003) Accumulation of atmospheric mercury in forest foliage. Atmos Environ 37:1613–1622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fitzgerald WF, Engstrom DR, Mason RP et al (1998) The case for atmospheric mercury contamination in remote areas. Environ Sci Technol 32:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fleck JA, Grigal DF, Nater EA (1999) Mercury uptake by trees: and observational experiment. Water Air Soil Poll 115:513–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frescholtz TF, Gustin MS, Schorran DE et al (2003) Assessing the source of mercury in foliar tissue of quaking aspen. Environ Toxicol Chem 22:2114–2119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Friedli HR, Radke LF, Lu JY (2001) Mercury in smoke from biomass fires. Geophys Res Let 28(17):3223–3226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fritsche J, Obrist D, Alewell C (2006) Effects of microbiological activity on Hg0 emission in uncontaminated terrestrial soils. In: Abstracts of the 8th international conference on mercury as a global pollutant, Madison, USA, August 6–11 2006Google Scholar
  14. Fritsche J, Obrist D, Alewell C (2007) Evidence of microbial control of Hg0 emissions from uncontaminated terrestrial soils. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci (in press)Google Scholar
  15. Godbold D, Hüttermann A (1988) Inhibition of photosynthesis and transpiration in relation to mercury-induced root damage in spruce seedlings. Physiol Plant 74:270–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grigal DF (2002) Inputs and outputs of mercury from terrestrial watersheds: a review. Environ Rev 10:1–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grigal DF, Kolka RK, Fleck JA et al (2000) Mercury budget of an upland-peatland watershed. Biogeochem 50:95–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gustin MS, Marsik F, Obrist D (2006) Air-surface exchange of mercury in terrestrial ecosystems. In: Abstracts of the 8th international conference on mercury as a global pollutant, Madison, USA, August 6–11 2006Google Scholar
  19. Hall CAS, Ekdahl CA, Wartenberg DE (1975) A fifteen-year record of biotic metabolism in the Northern Hemisphere. Nature 255:136–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanson PJ, Lindberg SE, Tabberer TA, Owens JG, Kim K-H (1995) Foliar exchange of mercury vapor: evidence for a compensation point. Water Air Soil Poll 80:373–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lindberg SE (1996) Forests and the global biogeochemical cycle of mercury: The importance of understanding air/vegetation exchange processes. In: Baeyens W, Ebinghaus R, Vasiliev O (eds) Global and regional mercury cycles: Sources, fluxes and mass balances. NATOASISeries, vol 21. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 359–380Google Scholar
  22. Lindberg SE, Jackson DR, Huckabee JW et al (1979) Atmospheric emissions and plant uptake of mercury from agricultural soils near the Almaden mercury mine. J Environ Qual 8:572–578Google Scholar
  23. Mason RP, Fitzgerald WF, Morel FMM (1994) The biogeochemical cycling of elemental mercury: Anthropogenic influences. Geochim Cosm Acta 58:3191–3198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Milhollen AG, Gustin MS, Obrist D (2006a) Foliar mercury accumulation and exchange for three tree species. Environ Sci Technol 40:6001–6006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Milhollen AG, Obrist D, Gustin MS (2006b) Mercury accumulation in grass and forb species as a function of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and mercury. Chemosphere 65:889–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moore TR, Bubier JL, Heyes A, Flett RJ (1995) Methyl and total mercury in boreal wetland plants, experimental lakes area, Northwestern Ontario. J Environ Qual 24:845–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Munthe J, Hultberg H, Iverfeldt A (1995) Mechanisms of deposition of methylmercury and mercury to conifereous forests. Water Air Soil Poll 80:363–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Obrist D, Conen F, Vogt R et al (2006) Quantification of elemental Hg0 exchange using 222Rn/Hg0 accumulation in the stable nocturnal boundary layer. Atmos Environ 40:856–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pang SM (1997) Mercury in wood and wood fuels. Thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MNGoogle Scholar
  30. Prentice IC, Farquhar GD, Fasham MJR et al (2001) The carbon cycle and atmospheric carbon dioxide. In: Climate change 2001: The scientific basis. Contribution of working group I to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Saugier BS, Roy J, Mooney HA (2001) Estimations of global terrestrial productivity: converging toward a single number? In: Roy J, Saugier B, Mooney HA (eds) Terrestrial global productivity. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 543–557Google Scholar
  32. Schuster PF, Krabbenhoft DP, Naftz DL et al (2002) Atmospheric mercury deposition during the last 270 years: A glacial ice core record of natural and anthropogenic sources. Environ Sci Technol 36:2303–2310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Slemr F, Brunke E, Labuschagne C (2006) Long-term observations of total gaseous mercury at the Cape Point GAW Station, South Africa. In: Abstracts of the 8th international conference on mercury as a global pollutant, Madison, August 6–11 2006Google Scholar
  34. Slemr F, Scheel HE (1998) Trends in atmospheric mercury concentrations at the summit of the Wank mountain, Southern Germany. Atmos Environ 32:845–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Steele LP, Krummel PB, Langenfelds RL (2002) In Trends: A compendium of data on global change. Carbon dioxide information analysis center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak RidgeGoogle Scholar
  36. Tans PP, Conway TJ (2005) In Trends: A compendium of data on global change. Carbon dioxide information analysis center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak RidgeGoogle Scholar
  37. Turetsky MR, Harden JW, Friedli HR et al (2006) Wildfires threaten mercury stocks in northern soils. Geophys Res Let 33:L16403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Veiga MM, Meech JA, Onate N (1994) Mercury pollution from deforestation. Nature 368:816–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wickland K, Krabbenhoft D, Olund S (2006) Evidence for a link between soil respiration and mercury emission from organic soils. In: Abstracts of the 8th international conference on mercury as a global pollutant, Madison, August 6–11 2006Google Scholar
  40. Zhang L, Qian J, Planas D (1995a) Mercury concentrations in tree rings of black spruce (Picea mariana Mill. B.S.P) in boreal Quebec, Canada. Water Air Soil Poll 81:163–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zhang L, Planas D, Qian J (1995b) Mercury concentrations in black spruce (Picea mariana B.S.P) and lichens in boreal Quebec, Canada. Water Air Soil Poll 81:153–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Atmospheric SciencesDesert Research InstituteRenoUSA

Personalised recommendations