You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Factors Affecting Mercury Stable Isotopic Distribution in Piscivorous Fish of the Laurentian Great Lakes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science & Technology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1021/acs.est.7b06120 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ryan F. Lepak, Sarah E. Janssen, Runsheng Yin, David P. Krabbenhoft, Jacob M. Ogorek, John F. DeWild, Michael T. Tate, Thomas M. Holsen, James P. Hurley |
| Abstract |
Identifying the sources of methylmercury (MeHg) and tracing the transformations of mercury (Hg) in the aquatic food web is an important component of effective strategies for managing fish Hg concentrations. In our previous work we measured stable isotopes of Hg (δ202Hg, Δ199Hg, and Δ200Hg) in the Laurentian Great Lakes and estimated source contributions of Hg to bottom sediment. Here, we identify isotopically distinct Hg signatures for Great Lakes predatory fish. Fish reflect high values for odd-isotope mass independent fractionation (MIF) that span a large range in Δ199Hg (2.27 - 6.73‰). With the exception of Lake Erie, temporal variability and intralake specific signatures were not evident. The large range in odd-MIF reflects variability in the depth of the euphotic zone where Hg is most likely incorporated into the food web. Even-isotope MIF, a potential tracer for Hg from precipitation, appears both disconnected from lake sedimentary sources and comparable in magnitude among the lakes. When comparing isotopic Hg signatures in sediment and MeHg in fish, bioaccumulated MeHg isotopic signatures are more reflective of atmospheric precipitation than sediment. We also conclude that the degree of photochemical processing of Hg is controlled by phytoplankton uptake rather than by dissolved organic carbon quantity among lakes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 23% |
| Researcher | 9 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 11 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 12 | 28% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 5 | 12% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 June 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Technology
#18,056
of 20,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#341,116
of 470,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Technology
#248
of 302 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,680 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.8. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 470,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 302 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.