Continuous Analysis of Dissolved Gaseous Mercury and Mercury Volatilization in the Upper St. Lawrence River: Exploring Temporal Relationships and UV Attenuation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The formation and volatilization of dissolved gaseous mercury (DGM) is an important mechanism by which freshwaters may naturally reduce their mercury burden. Continuous analysis of surface water for diurnal trends in DGM concentration (ranging from 0 to 60.4 pg L(-1); n=613), mercury volatilization (ranging from 0.2 to 1.1 ng m(-2) h(-1); n=584), and a suite of physical and chemical measurements were performed during a 68 h period in the St. Lawrence River near Cornwall (Ontario, Canada) to examine the temporal relationships governing mercury volatilization. No lag-time was observed between net radiation and OGM concentrations (highest cross-correlation of 0.817), thus supporting previous research indicating faster photoreduction kinetics in rivers as compared to lakes. A significant lag-time (55-145 min; maximum correlation = 0.625) was observed between DGM formation and mercury volatilization, which is similar to surface water Eddy diffusion times of 42-132 min previously measured in the St. Lawrence River. A depth-integrated DGM model was developed using the diffuse integrated vertical attenuation coefficients for UVA and UVB (K(dI UVA) = 1.45 m(-1) K(dI UVB)= 3.20 m(-1)) Low attenuation of solar radiation was attributed to low concentrations of dissolved organic carbon (mean = 2.58 mg L(-1) and particulate organic carbon (mean = 0.58 mg L(-1) in the St. Lawrence River. The depth-integrated DGM model developed found that the top 0.3 m of the water column accounted for only 26% of the total depth-integrated DGM. A comparison with volatilization data indicated that a large portion (76% or 10.5 ng m(-2) of the maximum depth-integrated DGM (13.8 ng m(-2))is volatilized over a 24 h period. Therefore, at least 50% of all DGM volatilized was produced at depths below 0.3 m. These results highlight the importance of solar attenuation in regulating DGM formation with depth. The results also demonstrate both the fast formation of DGM in rivers and the importance of understanding DGM dynamics with depth as opposed to surface waters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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".