<p> Supplementary information for</p><p>Shark-fin, a symbol of wealth and good fortune may pose health risks – The case</p><p> of mercury</p><p>Yu Bon Mana,b,c1, Sheng Chun Wua,c1 and Ming Hung Wonga,b,c*</p><p> a School of Environmental and Resource Sciences, Zhejiang Agriculture and Forestry</p><p>University, Lin’an, Zhejiang 311300, China</p><p> b Department of Science and Environmental Studies, The Hong Kong Institute of</p><p>Education, Tai Po, Hong Kong, China</p><p> c State Key Laboratory in Marine Pollution - Croucher Institute for Environmental</p><p>Sciences, Hong Kong Baptist University and City University of Hong Kong, Hong</p><p>Kong, China</p><p>Corresponding author at: Department of Science and Environmental Studies, The</p><p>Hong Kong Institute of Education, Tai Po, Hong Kong, China. Tel.: +852 2948 8706.</p><p>E-mail address: [email protected] (M.H.Wong).</p><p>1Yu Bon Man and Sheng Chun Wu contributed equally to this work. Figure S1 Pearson correlation of total mercury (µg/kg) and MeHg (µg/kg) in the shark fin samples of Beijing and four coastal cities (Hong Kong, Shanghai, Haikou and Wenzhou) in China.</p><p>Table S1 Parameters and reference dose for estimating the human non-cancer risk after consumption of shark fins </p><p>Exposure factors Adult Child Reference Daily consumption rate of shark fins (kg/day) 0.00175 0.000938 (Census and Statistics Department 2009, 2012; Leung et al. 2000)) Extreme consumption rate of shark fins (kg/day) 0.15 0.0807 (Census and Statistics Department 2009, 2012; The 8 restaurant 2009) Body weight, BW (kg) 60 15 (Lee et al. 1994; US EPA, 1991) Reference dose for MeHg (µg/kg/day) 0.1 0.1 ( US EPA 2013) Table S2 F-value and significance levels of two-way ANOVA for mercury concentrations in different locations and sizes of shark fin</p><p>Analyses of variance F value (Total mercury) F value (MeHg) Location 0.905 4.07** Size 2.24 1.70 Location × size 1.59 0.790</p><p>** significant different level at 0.01 Table S3 Correlation matrix of shark fin mercury concentrations and length in Beijing and four coastal cities (Hong Kong, Shanghai, Haikou and Wenzhou) in China.</p><p>HK SH Total mercury MeHg Length Total mercury MeHg Length Total mercury 1 -0.0390 0.145 Total mercury 1 -0.0240 0.521 MeHg 1 0.431 MeHg 1 0.337 Length 1 Length 1 BJ HN Total mercury MeHg Length Total mercury MeHg Length Total mercury 1 0.640* 0.466 T Total mercury 1 0.882** 0.637* MeHg 1 0.415 MeHg 1 0.331 Length 1 Length 1 WZ Total MeHg Length mercury Total mercury 1 0.770** -0.757** MeHg 1 -0.575 Length 1 </p><p>Pearson correlation coefficients were shown. Values with * indicated that significant correlations were found at p=0.05, and values with ** indicated that significant correlations were found at p=0.01.</p><p>Note: HK Hong Kong, SH Shanghai, BJ Beijing, HN Haikou and WZ Wenzhou </p><p>Reference</p><p>Census and Statistics Department. Hong Kong Census Trade Statistic. (2009). Published by the Information Services Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government. Census and Statistics Department. (2012). HONG KONG: THE FACTS. Published by the Information Services Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government. Lee, M.M., Wu-williams, A., Whittemore, A.S., Zheng, S., Gallagher, R., the, C.Z., et al. (1994). Comparison of dietary habits, physical-activity and body-size among Chinese in North-America and China. International Journal of Epidemiology, 23(5), 984-990. Leung, S., Chan, S., Lui, S., Lee, W., Davies, D. (2000). Growth and nutrition of Hong Kong children aged 0–7 years. The Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 36(1), 56–65. The 8 restaurant. (2009). Grand Lisboa, Avenida de Lisboa, Macau. </p>