Effect of pH on Mercury Uptake by an Aquatic Bacterium: Implications for Hg Cycling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the effect of increasing hydrogen ion (H+) concentration on the uptake of mercury (Hg(II)) by an aquatic bacterium. Even small changes in pH (7.3-6.3) resulted in large increases in Hg(II) uptake, in defined media. The increased rate of bioaccumulation was directly proportional to the concentration of H+ and could not be explained by assuming that the source of Hg to the bacteria was diffusion of neutrally charged species such as HgCl2. Thus, pH appeared to affect a facilitated mechanism by which Hg(II) is taken up by the cells. Lowering the pH of Hg solutions mixed together with natural dissolved organic carbon, or with whole lake water, also increased bacterial uptake of Hg(II). These findings have several potential implications for mercury cycling, including effects on elemental mercury production, mercury sedimentation, and microbial methylation of Hg(II), and could be part of the explanation for the observed positive correlation between lake acidity and methyl mercury levels in fish.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".