2013
DOI: 10.1007/s11270-013-1744-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Building upon the Conceptual Model for Soil Mercury Flux: Evidence of a Link Between Moisture Evaporation and Hg Evasion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
32
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
4
32
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Mercury "rainout" -or the tendency for mercury rainwater loading to decrease with increasing precipitation -has also been demonstrated in Mercury Deposition Network (MDN) data in North America (Glass and Sorensen, 1999;Prestbo and Gay, 2009) and positive correlations between GEM (TGM) and rainwater mercury have been reported in MDN data (GEM; Cole et al, 2014) and at Cape Point, South Africa (TGM; Brunke et al, 2016). Re-emission of any deposited mercury is likely to be inhibited throughout the wet season, as it has been shown that GEM emission from background mercury soils is suppressed when the soils are saturated (Briggs and Gustin, 2013). Mercury wet deposition is currently not being measured at ATARS; however, given the large differences in GEM trends between the wet and dry seasons, these measurements could help to highlight differing processes between these periods.…”
Section: Overall Means and Seasonal Trendsmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…Mercury "rainout" -or the tendency for mercury rainwater loading to decrease with increasing precipitation -has also been demonstrated in Mercury Deposition Network (MDN) data in North America (Glass and Sorensen, 1999;Prestbo and Gay, 2009) and positive correlations between GEM (TGM) and rainwater mercury have been reported in MDN data (GEM; Cole et al, 2014) and at Cape Point, South Africa (TGM; Brunke et al, 2016). Re-emission of any deposited mercury is likely to be inhibited throughout the wet season, as it has been shown that GEM emission from background mercury soils is suppressed when the soils are saturated (Briggs and Gustin, 2013). Mercury wet deposition is currently not being measured at ATARS; however, given the large differences in GEM trends between the wet and dry seasons, these measurements could help to highlight differing processes between these periods.…”
Section: Overall Means and Seasonal Trendsmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…These would be similar to the study of Gustin and Stamenkovic (2005) and Xin et al (2007) which observed that the fluxes were enhanced gradually with the substrate moisture decreasing, and then the fluxes were decreased with the soil moisture continuous decreasing. Gustin and Stamenkovic (2005) and Briggs and Gustin (2013) supposed the possible reason that soil with high water volumes, the water will saturate the soil pores and inhibits the soil gas exchange with the atmosphere, inhibiting the mercury emissions from the saturated substrate, whereas we have not tested the soil saturation in the subtropical forest. Briggs and Gustin (2013) also suggested that soil moisture was the most important parameter predicting mercury flux and the evaporative stage of soil moisture was used to partition the parameters that are most important for controlling mercury flux as the soils dried.…”
Section: Influence Of Atmospheric Tgm On the Mercury Flux: Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some recent studies and models of its cycle in the environment suggested that mercury emissions and re-emissions from soil and vegetation were estimated up to 5500-8900 tons, accounting for 19-51% of the current release to the atmosphere from all sources (UNEP, 2013). Furthermore, studies have also reported that mercury evasion from forest and grassland was an important source of total gaseous mercury (TGM) in the atmosphere in the background area (Zhou et al, 2015;Ericksen et al, 2006;Choi and Holsen, 2009a;Almeida et al, 2009). Therefore, soil/air exchange flux is an important component of the mercury global biogeochemical cycle.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…10) then the compared planted soil and sulphur treated soil (no plants), which suggests differences in the Hg biogeochemical cycle related to soil properties and the soil/plant relationship. According to the Conceptual Model for soil mercury flux (Briggs and Gustin 2013), if the soil becomes saturated, Hg flux will be suppressed due to the soil pores becoming filled with water. In the soil profile Hg desorption and dilution processes dominate.…”
Section: Soil Leachatesmentioning
confidence: 99%