Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 256

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Methyl-Mercury Degradation Pathways: A Comparison among Three Mercury-Impacted Ecosystems

Marvin-DiPasquale, Mark, Agee, Jennifer, McGowan, Chad, Oremland, Ronald S., Thomas, Martha, Krabbenhoft, David, Gilmour, Cynthia C.·2000·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

We examined microbial methylmercury (MeHg) degradation in sediment of the Florida Everglades, Carson River (NV), and San Carlos Creek (CA), three freshwater environments that differ in the extent and type of mercury contamination and sediment biogeochemistry. Degradation rate constant ( k deg ) values increased with total mercury (Hg t ) contamination both among and within ecosystems. The highest k deg 's (2.8−5.8 d - 1 ) were observed in San Carlos Creek, at acid mine drainage impacted sites immediately downstream of the former New Idria mercury mine, where Hg t ranged from 4.5 to 21.3 ppm (dry wt). A reductive degradation pathway (presumably mer -detoxification) dominated degradation at these sites, as indicated by the nearly exclusive production of 14 CH 4 from 14 C-MeHg, under both aerobic and anaerobic conditions. At the upstream control site, and in the less contaminated ecosystems (e.g. the Everglades), k deg 's were low (≤0.2 d - 1 ) and oxidative demethylation (OD) dominated degradation, as evident from 14 CO 2 production. k deg increased with microbial CH 4 production, organic content, and reduced sulfur in the Carson River system and increased with decreasing pH in San Carlos Creek. OD associated CO 2 production increased with pore-water SO 4 2- in Everglades samples but was not attributable to anaerobic methane oxidation, as has been previously proposed. This ecosystem comparison indicates that severely contaminated sediments tend to have microbial populations that actively degrade MeHg via mer -detoxification, whereas OD occurs in heavily contaminated sediments as well but dominates in those less contaminated.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/es0013125

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Cited by

See all 256

Metadata

Authors
Marvin-DiPasquale, M., Agee, J., McGowan, C., Oremland, R. S., Thomas, M., Krabbenhoft, D., & Gilmour, C. C.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2000-10-14
Volume
34
Issue
23
Pages
4908-4916
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W2008224475
Cited by
256
References
1
FWCI
5.72
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

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.