Use of native and transplanted mosses as complementary techniques for biomonitoring mercury around an industrial facility.

Terrestrial mosses were used simultaneously in passive (native species, Scleropodium purum and Hypnum cupressiforme) and active (S. purum transplants in moss bags) biomonitoring techniques in a study that aimed to demonstrate the compatibility of the two methods by detailed investigation of the spatial distribution of mercury in the surroundings of a chlor-alkali plant. Native mosses were sampled and transplants exposed (for periods of 30 days) at two different times of the year in order to take into account different environmental conditions (precipitation, temperature, prevailing winds, etc.). The concentrations of Hg in the native mosses ranged between 0.04 and 11.78 microg g(-1) in February and 0.26 and 12.7 microg g(-1) in September; in the transplants the concentrations ranged between 0.39 and 1.9 microg g(-1) in June and 0.036 and 2.75 microg g(-1) in November. These values are all within the ranges reported in the literature. The total concentrations were transformed into either contamination factors (CF) (by taking into account the background levels of Hg in the native mosses) or enrichment factors (EF) (by taking into account the initial concentrations in the transplants). In both cases, there was a clear relationship with the distance from the source of emission, irrespective of the time of year. Within the range of distances for which data were available for natives and transplants, the CF and EF were highly correlated. This implies that transplants sited in the area immediately surrounding the plant, where the density of native mosses was very low, can be used to determine the degree of contamination in this area. The study also illustrated that the native moss appeared to adapt to the surrounding environment because at an equal distance (> 500 m) from the source of emission the value of the CF for native mosses fell to 1, but the EF for transplanted mosses remained still high (5.2).

[1]  J. Fernández,et al.  Evaluation of Contamination, by Different Elements, in Terrestrial Mosses , 2001, Archives of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[2]  G. Tyler.  Bryophytes and heavy metals: a literature review , 1990 .

[3]  Anthony Carpi,et al.  Bioaccumulation of Mercury by Sphagnum Moss Near a Municipal Solid Waste Incinerator , 1994 .

[4]  A. Carpi.  Mercury from combustion sources: A review of the chemical species emitted and their transport in the atmosphere , 1997 .

[5]  D. N. Rao.  Responses of Bryophytes to Air Pollution , 1982 .

[6]  J. Escribano.  Biocontrol de la calidad del aire de Galicia mediante musgos terrestres , 1999 .

[7]  A. Carballeira,et al.  Physiological and statistical methods to identify background levels of metals in aquatic bryophytes : Dependence on lithology , 1997 .

[8]  M. Lodenius.  Dry and wet deposition of mercury near a chlor-alkali plant , 1998 .

[9]  D. Landers,et al.  Mercury in vegetation and lake sediments from the U. S. arctic , 1995 .

[10]  H. González.  Mercury pollution caused by a chlor-alkali plant , 1991 .

[11]  F. Macnaeidhe.  Procedures and precautions used in sampling techniques and analysis of trace elements in plant matrices , 1995 .

[12]  R. Norstrom,et al.  Heavy metals and essential elements in livers of the polar bear (Ursus maritimus) in the Canadian Arctic. , 1986, The Science of the total environment.

[13]  P. S. Tjioe,et al.  Mercury-Selenium Correlations in Marine Mammals , 1973, Nature.

[14]  R. Bargagli.  Trace elements in terrestrial plants , 1998 .

[15]  J. Fernández,et al.  An extended study of heavy metal deposition in Galicia (NW Spain) based on moss analysis. , 2000, The Science of the total environment.

[16]  R. Bargagli,et al.  Environmental Impact of Trace Element Emissions from Geothermal Power Plants , 1997, Archives of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[17]  S. Tanabe,et al.  Specific accumulation of mercury and selenium in seabirds. , 1996, Environmental pollution.

[18]  J. Fernández,et al.  Differences in the responses of native and transplanted mosses to atmospheric pollution: a possible role of selenium. , 2000, Environmental pollution.

[19]  J. Oehlmann,et al.  A comparison of heavy metal deposition in selected Eastern European countries using the moss monitoring method, with special emphasis on the ‘Black Triangle’ , 1996 .

[20]  U. Herpin,et al.  The distribution of heavy metals in a transect of the three states the Netherlands, Germany and Poland, determined with the aid of moss monitoring , 1996 .

[21]  R. Boaventura,et al.  Sediments and aquatic mosses as pollution indicators for heavy metals in the Ave river basin (Portugal) , 1992 .

[22]  R. Bargagli,et al.  Metal biomonitoring with mosses: procedures for correcting for soil contamination. , 1995, Environmental pollution.

[23]  J. Ruuskanen,et al.  Airborne pollutants along a roadside: assessment using snow analyses and moss bags. , 1997, Environmental pollution.

[24]  J. Fernández,et al.  Estimation of Background Levels of Various Elements in Terrestrial Mosses from Galicia (NW Spain) , 2002 .

[25]  O. Malm,et al.  Elemental mercury contamination survey in a chlor-alkali plant by the use of transplanted Spanish moss, Tillandsia usneoides (L.). , 1997, The Science of the total environment.

[26]  Celia A. Evans,et al.  Mercury accumulation in transplanted moss and lichens at high elevation sites in Quebec , 1996 .

[27]  P. Harrison,et al.  Seaweed Ecology and Physiology. , 1995 .

[28]  I. Turkan,et al.  Comparison of moss and bark samples as biomonitors of heavy metals in a highly industrialised area in Izmir, Turkey , 1995 .

[29]  B. Godzik,et al.  Heavy metal deposition in polish national parks — Changes during ten years , 1990 .