Using Multiple Sentinel Species and Stable Isotopes to Understand Mercury Sources and Fate in Temperate Streams
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
USING MULTIPLE SENTINEL SPECIES AND STABLE ISOTOPES TO UNDERSTAND MERCURY SOURCES AND FATE IN TEMPERATE STREAMS by Timothy D. Jardine B.Sc., Dalhousie University, 1996-2000 M.Sc., University of New Brunswick, 2001-2003 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Doctor of Philosophy In the Graduate Academic Unit of Biology Supervisor(s): Dr. Karen A. Kidd (Biology) Examining Board: Dr. Jeff Houlahan (Biology) Dr. James Kieffer (Biology) Dr. Charles Bourque (Forestry and Environmental Management) External Examiner: Dr. Gilbert Cabana (Departément de Chimie-Biologie, Université du Québec à Trois Rivières) This thesis is accepted by the Dean of Graduate Studies. THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK December, 2008 ©Timothy D. Jardine, 2009 GENERAL ABSTRACT The goal of this dissertation was to better understand mercury (Hg) dynamics in running waters. It employed two techniques, analysis of stable isotopes of carbon and nitrogen and the use of sentinel species, to achieve this goal. I began by learning about the feeding ecology of a common predatory insect, the water strider (Aquarius remigis) that I hoped to use as an indicator of aquatic Hg contamination. I found that water striders exhibited a strong connection to the riparian zone via consumption of terrestrial insects that made up a majority of their diet. Water striders also had Hg concentrations that were weakly related to variables known to influence Hg in waterbodies, such as pH and dissolved organic carbon content. Instead water strider Hg concentrations were predicted by their body size, trophic level and proximity to a coal-fired power plant that annually emits ~ 100 kg of Hg to the atmosphere. This suggests that striders are terrestrial organisms that happen to spend much of their time on the surface of the water, and they tell us little about processes occurring in the aquatic environment. I then sampled algae, invertebrates and fishes from 60 stream and river sites in New Brunswick, Canada from 2004-2007. I found that the small minnow, blacknose dace, accumulated far more Hg than the larger species brook trout that is often caught by recreational anglers. Mercury concentrations in blacknose dace were predicted mainly by the pH of the water; acidic streams had dace with highest Hg concentrations. Trout Hg concentrations were determined more by their diet and their proximity to the coal-fired power plant. Trout that fed higher on the food chain and lived in streams within 50 km of the power plant had the highest Hg concentrations, but none of these concentrations were above the human health consumption guideline of 0.5 ug g-1 wet weight. Mercury ii increased four- to five-fold with each step in the food chain, similar to rates found in lakes and oceans, and differences in Hg concentrations in fishes were determined largely by differences at the base of the food chain. All of these analyses suggest that patterns of Hg biomagnification in streams and rivers is similar to that observed in other ecosystems, and that Hg exposure will depend on the species that are present and the amount of Hg available at the base of the food chain. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A thesis is never a product of a single person, and this work is no exception. Given that the ideas for this dissertation began as early as 2003, and it is now 2008, it is no surprise that I have had plenty of help along the way. I’ll start with my supervisor Karen. I consider her to be the ideal supervisor, no mean feat since she is so new at this game. At times she was thoughtful and caring (e.g. insisting on celebrating birthdays even if she was made aware months too late). At other times she was tough and decisive, insisting on a high-quality product no matter the consequences. I am forever grateful that she was willing to take me on in the first place and then allow me to leave before the end of three years to start a post-doc in Australia. Thank you Karen. Next up is my committee: Rick, Kelly and Neil. Where would I be without them? Perhaps I would be climbing telephone poles to try and collect osprey feathers. Did I really think I could do that? Thanks for keeping me on track so far. A lot of the work I did during this degree involved solo missions, driving alone to remote points in New Brunswick, not telling anyone where I had gone or when to expect me back. However there was also no shortage of teamwork required, particularly when it came time to do some electro-fishing. I am grateful to have had numerous individuals who gave their time to spend with me chasing fish and those elusive water striders. These include: Aaron Fraser, Matt Sabean, Sherisse McWilliam, Tim Arciszewski, Kelly Lippert, Tim Barrett, Matt Sullivan, Rutger Engelbertink, Philip Brett, Noel Swain, Sara Fraser, Len Giardi, Pete Emerson, Craig Poole, Rachel Keeler, and Chris Blanar. iv I also had plenty of assistance with laboratory analyses. These analyses ranged from water quality (John O’Keefe) to total (Paul Arp, Dragana Perkmann, Duc Banh, and Mina Nasr) and methyl (David Lean, Emmanuel Yumvihoze, Ogo Nwobu, Brianna Wyn, Leanne Baker, Ellen Belyea and Ellen Campbell) mercury analysis and most of all, stable isotopes. One of the advantages of working in an isotope lab is the all-access privileges that you acquire. Anne, Mireille and Christine had the patience to deal with my incomplete submissions, last minute requests and other incessant demands as I scrambled to get the data. I’ve learned a lot from each of you. I was generously funded by several agencies during this project. NSERC came through with a postgraduate scholarship to me and Discovery Grant funding to Karen. The New Brunswick government has been on board from the start, providing funds from WTF and ETF. The O’Brien Humanitarian Trust gave me a large sum of money early on in the project. Lastly UNB graciously kicked in with Grand Lake Meadows Fund money, as well as a Doctoral Tuition award and an Eaton Fellowship for travel. Finally I must thank my wife Laura. When I started at UNB so many years ago, I had no idea I would be lucky enough to have such a wonderful person with whom to share my life. It also doesn’t hurt that she was a source of skilled labour. And Tinky helped me too. v Table of Contents GENERAL ABSTRACT.................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................... iv Table of Contents...............................................................................................................vi List of Tables ...................................................................................................................viii List of Figures.................................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1.0 Introduction to the Problem ........................................................................ 1 1.1 Background......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 References........................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 2.0 Applications, Considerations, and Sources of Uncertainty When Using Stable Isotope Analysis in Ecotoxicology ........................................................................ 16 Abstract............................................................................................................................. 16 2.1 Introduction....................................................................................................... 17 2.1.1 Qualitative Studies.................................................................................... 19 2.1.2 Biomagnification Studies.......................................................................... 20 2.1.3 Quantitative Assessment of Carbon Sources ............................................ 24 2.2 Considerations and Sources of Uncertainty...................................................... 28 2.2.1 Consideration/Source of Uncertainty 1: Unequal Diet-Tissue Fractionation Among Species................................................................................... 28 2.2.2 Consideration/Source of Uncertainty 2: Variable Diet-Tissue Fractionation Within a Species ................................................................................. 32 2.2.3 Consideration/Source of Uncertainty 3: Different Tissues From an Individual Animal Have Variable Stable Isotope Ratios.......................................... 34 2.2.4 Consideration/Source of Uncertainty 4: Baseline Stable Isotope Ratios Vary Across Systems ................................................................................................ 37 2.2.5 Consideration/Source of Uncertainty 5: The Presence of Omnivores..... 38 2.2.6 Consideration/Source of Uncertainty 6: Movement of Animals and Nutrients Between Food Webs/Ecosystems ............................................................. 39 2.3 New Directions................................................................................................. 41 2.4 Acknowledgements........................................................................................... 45 2.5 References......................................................................................................... 45 2.6 Tables and Captions.........................................................................................