Methylmercury is the Predominant Form of Mercury in Bird Eggs: A Synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bird eggs are commonly used in mercury monitoring programs to assess methylmercury contamination and toxicity to birds. However, only 6% of >200 studies investigating mercury in bird eggs have actually measured methylmercury concentrations in eggs. Instead, studies typically measure total mercury in eggs (both organic and inorganic forms of mercury), with the explicit assumption that total mercury concentrations in eggs are a reliable proxy for methylmercury concentrations in eggs. This assumption is rarely tested, but has important implications for assessing risk of mercury to birds. We conducted a detailed assessment of this assumption by (1) collecting original data to examine the relationship between total and methylmercury in eggs of two species, and (2) reviewing the published literature on mercury concentrations in bird eggs to examine whether the percentage of total mercury in the methylmercury form differed among species. Within American avocets (Recurvirostra americana) and Forster's terns (Sterna forsteri), methylmercury concentrations were highly correlated (R(2) = 0.99) with total mercury concentrations in individual eggs (range: 0.03-7.33 μg/g fww), and the regression slope (log scale) was not different from one (m = 0.992). The mean percentage of total mercury in the methylmercury form in eggs was 97% for American avocets (n = 30 eggs), 96% for Forster's terns (n = 30 eggs), and 96% among all 22 species of birds (n = 30 estimates of species means). The percentage of total mercury in the methylmercury form ranged from 63% to 116% among individual eggs and 82% to 111% among species means, but this variation was not related to total mercury concentrations in eggs, foraging guild, nor to a species life history strategy as characterized along the precocial to altricial spectrum. Our results support the use of total mercury concentrations to estimate methylmercury concentrations in bird eggs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".