The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Effects of mercury on wildlife: A comprehensive review
Abstract
Wildlife may be exposed to mercury (Hg) and methylmercury (MeHg) from a variety of environmental sources, including mine tailings, industrial effluent, agricultural drainwater, impoundments, and atmospheric deposition from electric power generation. Terrestrial and aquatic wildlife may be at risk from exposure to waterborne Hg and MeHg. The transformation of inorganic Hg by anaerobic sediment microorganisms in the water column produces MeHg, which bioaccumulates at successive trophic levels in the food chain. If high trophic level feeders, such as piscivorous birds and mammals, ingest sufficient MeHg in prey and drinking water, Hg toxicoses, including damage to nervous, excretory and reproductive systems, result. Currently accepted no observed adverse effect levels (NOAELs) for waterborne Hg in wildlife have been developed from the piscivorous model in which most dietary Hg is in the methyl form. Such model are not applicable to omnivores, insectivores, and other potentially affected groups, and have not incorpotated data from other important matrices, such as eggs and muscle. The purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive review of the Hg literature as it relates to effects on wildlife, including previously understudied groups. We present a critique of the current state of knowledge about effects of Hg on wildlife as an aid to identifying missing information and to planning research needed for conducting a complete assessment of Hg risks to wildlife. This review summarizes the toxicity of Hg to birds and mammals, the mechanisms of Hg toxicity, the measurement of Hg in biota, and interpretation of residue data.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Ros‐Lis, J. V., Marcos, M. D., Mártinez‐Máñez, R., Rurack, K., & Soto, J. (2005) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.200500583 · Cited by 355
Kalisinska, E., Lisowski, P., & Kosik-Bogacka, D. I. (2012) · Biological Trace Element Research · doi:10.1007/s12011-011-9181-z · Cited by 54
Dainowski, B. H., Duffy, L. K., McIntyre, J., & Jones, P. (2015) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.013 · Cited by 28
Komov, V. T., Ivanova, E. S., Gremyachikh, V. A., & Poddubnaya, N. Y. (2016) · Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · doi:10.1007/s00128-016-1891-7 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Wolfe, M. F., Schwarzbach, S., & Sulaiman, R. A.
- Venue
- Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1998-02-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 146-160
- ISSN
- 0730-7268 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8618
- OpenAlex
- W2081357400
- Cited by
- 887
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effects of mercury on wildlife: A comprehensive review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/etc.5620170203
- The paper
- Wolfe, M. F., Schwarzbach, S., & Sulaiman, R. A. (1998). Effects of mercury on wildlife: A comprehensive review. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620170203
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.