USGS
South Florida Information Access
SOFIA home
Help
Projects
by Title
by Investigator
by Region
by Topic
by Program
Results
Publications
Meetings
South Florida Restoration Science Forum
Synthesis
Information
Personnel
About SOFIA
USGS Science Strategy
DOI Greater Everglades Science Plan
Education
Upcoming Events
Data
Data Exchange
Metadata
publications > paper > source identification of Florida Bay's methylmercury problem > figures and tables

Source Identification of Florida Bay's Methylmercury Problem: Mainland Runoff Versus Atmospheric Deposition and In situ Production

Figures and Tables

Abstract
Introduction
Study Area and Methods
Results and Discussion
Acknowledgments
References
>Figures and Tables

Figures

Fig. 1 Map of Florida Bay and its watershed showing sampling stations along two transects and at a single reference site. The Mercury Deposition Network (MDN) site is also shown

Fig. 2 Box plots showing the median, the 25th/75th percentile and the 10th/90th percentile concentrations of unfiltered total mercury (THg), methylmercury (MeHg), percent of THg as MeHg (%MeHg) and salinity of surface water samples collected quarterly from February 2000 through September 2002. Sites with similar letter designations within a transect did not differ significantly

Fig. 3 Box plots of filtered total mercury (THgF), filtered methylmercury (MeHgF) and % MeHg of surface water samples collected contemporaneously with unfiltered samples.

Fig. 4 Time series of water column concentrations of THg, MeHg and salinity. Bottom panel shows flows and rainfall measured at Taylor River (Taylor Slough Basin transect) and Trout Creek (C-111 Basin transect)

Fig. 5 Time series of filterable THg and MeHg

Fig. 6 Bar graph showing concentrations of THg, MeHg and percent of THg as MeHg in composite samples of sediment collected along Taylor Slough transect and at the reference site on a roughly semi-annual basis from late February 2000 through September 2002. Salinity measured just above bottom is also shown

Fig. 7 Bar graph showing concentrations of THg, MeHg and percent of THg as MeHg in sediment collected along C-111 Canal transect; freshwater marsh sites were sampled on an irregularly basis depending on airboat access. Salinity measured just above bottom is also shown

Fig. 8 Percent 202Hg methylation during a 24-h incubation of cores collected along transects.

Fig. 9 Relationship between organic content (%LOI) of sediments from top of cores and ambient THg, ambient MeHg and percent 202Hg methylation in incubated cores

Tables

Table 1 Comparison of median (and maximum) concentrations reported by the different contract laboratories for different analyte-matrix combinations

Table 2 Results of laboratory and field quality control check samples reported by the primary contract laboratory

Table 3 Source of hydrometeorological data used to estimate mass loads

Table 4 Surface water discharges and seasonal mass loads of (total mercury THg) and methylmercury (MeHg) at various locations by water-year (wet season is May-October, dry season is from November through April of the following year).

Table 5 Seasonal rainfall totals and loads from wet atmospheric deposition to select basins by water-year


< References



| Disclaimer | Privacy Statement | Accessibility |

U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
This page is: http://sflwww.er.usgs.gov/publications/papers/mehg_source/figs_tables.html
Comments and suggestions? Contact: Heather Henkel - Webmaster
Last updated: 15 January, 2013 @ 12:43 PM (KP)