The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
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
Open accessAbstract
Current research focus in mercury biogeochemistry is on the net production and accumulation of methyl mercury (MeHg) in organisms. The activity of iron‐ and sulfate‐reducing bacteria (FeRB and SRB) has been identified as important for MeHg production. There are indications of a passive uptake of neutral Hg‐sulfides by SRB, as well as of a facilitated bacterial uptake of Hg complexed by small organic molecules. In order to understand these processes, the chemical speciation of Hg and MeHg, and most important, the competition among organic thiols and inorganic sulfides and polysulfides, needs to be clarified under suboxic conditions (nM to low μ M range of total sulfide concentrations) in wetland soils and sediments. In this paper the chemical speciation of Hg and MeHg is modeled at pH 4.0 and 7.0 in a conceptual wetland soil/sediment with typical concentrations of thiols, sulfides, Hg, and MeHg. Effects of precipitated HgS(s), the formation of Hg‐polysulfides, and the size of the controversial stability constant for the formation of HOHgSH 0 (aq) are emphasized. The outcome of the modeling is discussed in light of chosen stability constants for Hg complexes with thiols, sulfides, and polysulfides. It is concluded that organic thiols are competitive with inorganic sulfides in the approximate total sulfide concentration range 0–1 μ m. It is also concluded that increases in absolute aqueous concentrations of MeHg, or the molar ratio of dissolved MeHg/Hg, are not appropriate as indirect measures of MeHg net production, unless changes and differences in solubility of MeHg and Hg are corrected for.
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
Cites
Sulfate stimulation of mercury methylation in freshwater sediments
Gilmour, C. C., Henry, E. A., & Mitchell, R. (1992) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es00035a029 · Cited by 1,124
Cited by
Mercury Methylation by Novel Microorganisms from New Environments
Gilmour, C. C., Podar, M., Bullock, A. L., Graham, A. M., Brown, S. D., Somenahally, A. C., Johs, A., Hurt, R. A., Bailey, K. L., & Elias, D. A. (2013) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es403075t · Cited by 734
Heavy Metal Sorption at the Muscovite (001)–Fulvic Acid Interface
Lee, S. S., Nagy, K. L., Park, C., & Fenter, P. (2011) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es201323a · Cited by 39
Metadata
- Authors
- Skyllberg, U.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 113
- Issue
- G2
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2071858655
- Cited by
- 279
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: 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. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2008jg000745
- The paper
- 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. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008jg000745
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.