Thiol-Based Selective Extraction Assay to Comparatively Assess Bioavailable Mercury in Sediments
Publication: Environmental Engineering Science
Volume 32, Issue Number 7
Abstract
Bioaccumulation of methylmercury in the aquatic food web is governed in part by the methylation of inorganic divalent mercury (Hg(II)) by anaerobic microorganisms. In sulfidic settings, a small fraction of total Hg(II) is typically bioavailable to methylating microorganisms. Quantification of this fraction is difficult due to uncertainties in the speciation of Hg(II) and the mechanisms of uptake by methylating microbes. However, recent studies have shown that the bioavailable fraction is likely to include a portion of Hg(II) associated with solid phases, that is, nanostructured mercuric sulfides. Moreover, addition of thiols to suspensions of methylating cultures coincides with increased uptake into cells and methylmercury production. Here, we present a thiol-based selective extraction assay to provide information on the bioavailable Hg fraction in sediments. In the procedure, sediment samples were exposed to a nitrogen-purged solution of glutathione (GSH) for 30 min and the amount of GSH-leachable mercury was quantified. In nine sediment samples from a marine location, the relative GSH-leachable mercury concentration was strongly correlated to the relative amount of methylmercury in the sediments (r2=0.91, p<0.0001) across an order of magnitude of methylmercury concentration values. The approach was further applied to anaerobic sediment slurry microcosm experiments in which sediments were cultured under the same microbial growth conditions but were amended with multiple forms of Hg with a known spectrum of bioavailability. GSH-leachable Hg concentrations increased with observed methylmercury concentrations in the microcosms, matching the trend of species bioavailability in our previous work. Results suggest that a thiol-based selective leaching approach is an improvement compared with other proposed methods to assess Hg bioavailability in sediment and that this approach could provide a basis for comparison of sites where Hg methylation is a concern.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Benoit J.M., Gilmour C.C., Mason R.P., and Heyes A. (1999a). Sulfide controls on mercury speciation and bioavailability to methylating bacteria in sediment pore waters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 33, 951.
Benoit J.M., Mason R.P., and Gilmour C.C. (1999b). Estimation of mercury-sulfide speciation in sediment pore waters using octanol-water partitioning and implications for availability to methylating bacteria. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 18, 2138.
Bloom N.S., Preus E., Katon J., and Hiltner M. (2003). Selective extractions to assess the biogeochemically relevant fractionation of inorganic mercury in sediment and soils. Anal. Chim. Acta 479, 233.
Cai Y., Jaffé R., Alli A., and Jones R.D. (1996). Determination of organomercury compounds in aqueous samples by capillary gas chromatography-atomic fluorescence spectrometry following solid-phase extraction. Anal. Chim. Acta 334, 251.
Clarkson T.W. (1997). The toxicology of mercury. Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci. 34, 369.
Clarkson T.W. (2002). The three modern faces of mercury. Environ. Health Perspect. 110, 11.
Compeau G.C., and Bartha R. (1985). Sulfate-reducing bacteria: Principal methylators of mercury in anoxic estuarine sediment. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 50, 498.
Deonarine A., and Hsu-Kim H. (2009). Precipitation of mercuric sulfide nanoparticles in NOM-containing water: Implications for the natural environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 2368.
Drott A., Lambertsson L., Bjorn E., and Skyllberg U. (2007). Importance of dissolved neutral mercury sulfides for methyl mercury production in contaminated sediments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 41, 2270.
Dunham-Cheatham S., Farrell B., Mishra B., Myneni S., and Fein J.B. (2014). The effect of chloride on the adsorption of Hg onto three bacterial species. Chem. Geol. 373, 106.
Dunham-Cheatham S., Mishra B., Myneni S., and Fein J.B. (2015). The effect of natural organic matter on the adsorption of mercury to bacterial cells. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 150, 1.
Fleming E.J., Mack E.E., Green P.G., and Nelson D.C. (2006). Mercury methylation from unexpected sources: Molybdate-inhibited freshwater sediments and an iron-reducing bacterium. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72, 457.
Gerbig C.A., Kim C.S., Stegemeier J.P., Ryan J.N., and Aiken G.R. (2011). Formation of nanocolloidal metacinnabar in mercury-DOM-sulfide systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 9180.
Gill G.A., and Fitzgerald W.F. (1987). Picomolar mercury measurements in seawater and other materials using stannous chloride reduction and two-stage gold amalgamation with gas phase detection. Mar. Chem. 20, 227.
Gilmour C.C., Podar M., Bullock A.L., Graham A.M., Brown S.D., Somenahally A.C., Johs A., Hurt R.A. Jr., Bailey K.L., and Elias D.A. (2013). Mercury methylation by novel microorganisms from new environments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 11810.
Graham A.M., Aiken G.R., and Gilmour C.C. (2012a). Dissolved organic matter enhances microbial mercury methylation under sulfidic conditions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 2715.
Graham A.M., Bullock A.L., Maizel A.C., Elias D.A., and Gilmour C.C. (2012b). A detailed assessment of the kinetics of Hg-cell association, Hg methylation, and MeHg degradation in several Desulfovibrio species. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 78, 7337.
Hammerschmidt C.R., and Fitzgerald W.F. (2004). Geochemical controls on the production and distribution of methylmercury in near-shore marine sediments. Environ. Sci. Technol 38, 1487.
Hsu-Kim H. (2007). Stability of metal-gluathione complexes during oxidation by hydrogen peroxide and Cu(II)-catalysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 41, 2338.
Hsu-Kim H., Kucharzyk K.H., Zhang T., and Deshusses M.A. (2013). Mechanisms regulating mercury bioavailability for methylating microorganisms in the aquatic environment: A critical review. Environ. Sci. Technol.
Hsu H., and Sedlak D.L. (2003). Strong Hg(II) complexation in municipal wastewater effluent and surface waters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 37, 2743.
Hu H., Lin H., Zheng W., Rao B., Feng X., Liang L., Elias D.A., and Gu B. (2013). Mercury reduction and cell-surface adsorption by Geobacter sulfurreducens PCA. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 10922.
Joe-Wong C., Shoenfelt E., Hauser E.J., Crompton N., and Myneni S.C.B. (2012). Estimation of reactive thiol concentrations in dissolved organic matter and bacterial cell membranes in aquatic systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 9854.
Jones E., Oliphant T., and Peterson P. (2001). SciPy: Open Source Scientific Tools for Python. Available at www.scipy.org
Kim C.S., Bloom N.S., Rytuba J.J., and Brown G.E. (2003). Mercury speciation by X-ray absorption fine structure spectroscopy and sequential chemical extractions: A comparison of speciation methods. Environ. Sci. Technol 37, 5102.
King J.K., Saunders F.M., Lee R.F., and Jahnke R.A. (1999). Coupling mercury methylation rates to sulfate reduction rates in marine sediments. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 18, 1362.
Liang L., Horvat M., Alvarez J., Young L., Kotnik J., and Zhang L. (2013). The challenge and its solution when determining biogeochemically reactive inorganix mercury (RHg): Getting the analytical method right. Am. J. Anal. Chem. 4, 623.
Marvin-DiPasquale M.C., Lutz M.A., Brigham M.E., Krabbenhoft D.P., Aiken G.R., Orem W.H., and Hall B.D. (2009). Mercury cycling in streem ecosystems. 2. Benthic methylmercury production and bed sediment—Pore water partitioning. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 2726.
Merritt K.A., and Amirbahman A. (2009). Mercury methylation dynamics in estuarine and coastal marine environments—A critical review. Earth-Sci. Rev. 96, 54.
Miller C.L., Mason R.P., Gilmour C.C., and Heyes A. (2007). Influence of dissolved organic matter on the complexation of mercury under sulfidic conditions. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26, 624.
Pham A.L.-T., Morris A., Zhang T., Ticknor J., Levard C., and Hsu-Kim H. (2014). Precipitation of nanoscale mercuric sulfides in the presence of natural organic matter: Structural properties, aggregation, and biotransformation. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 133, 204.
Reddy C.A., Beveridge T.J., Breznak J.A., and Marzluf G. (2007). Methods for General and Molecular Microbiology. Washington, DC: ASM Press.
Schaefer J.K., Rocks S.S., Zheng W., Liang L., Gu B., and Morel F.M.M. (2011). Active transport, substrate specificity, and methylation of Hg(II) in anaerobic bacteria. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 108, 8714.
Skyllberg U. (2008). Competition among thiols and inorganic sulfides and polysulfides for Hg and MeHg in wetland soils and sediments under suboxic conditions: Illumination of controversies and implications for MeHg net production. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeo. 113.
Slowey A.J. (2010). Rate of formation and dissolution of mercury sulfide nanoparticles: The dual role of natural organic matter. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 74, 4693.
Vairavamurthy A., and Mopper K. (1990). Field methods for determination of traces of thiols in natural waters. Anal. Chim. Acta 236, 363.
Yu R.Q., Reinfelder J.R., Hines M.E., and Barkay T. (2013). Mercury methylation by the methanogen Methanospirillum hungatei. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 79, 6325.
Zhang T., Kim B., Levard C., Reinsch B.C., Lowry G.V., Deshusses M.A., and Hsu-Kim H. (2012). Methylation of mercury by bacteria exposed to dissolved, nanoparticulate, and microparticulate mercuric sulfides. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 6950.
Zhang T., Kucharzyk K.H., Kim B., Deshusses M.A., and Hsu-Kim H. (2014). Net methylation of mercury in estuarine sediment microcosms amended with dissolved, nanoparticulate, and microparticulate mercuric sulfides. Environ. Sci. Technol. 16, 9133.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Environmental Engineering Science
Volume 32 • Issue Number 7 • July 2015
Pages: 564 - 573
PubMed: 26244001
Copyright
Copyright 2015, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
History
Published online: 8 July 2015
Published in print: July 2015
Published ahead of print: 5 May 2015
Accepted: 24 March 2015
Received: 1 December 2014
Authors
Author Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Export Citation
Export citation
Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.
View Options
Access content
To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.⚠ Society Access
If you are a member of a society that has access to this content please log in via your society website and then return to this publication.