↓ Skip to main content

Mercury and methylmercury stream concentrations in a Coastal Plain watershed: A multi-scale simulation analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Pollution, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
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.
Title
Mercury and methylmercury stream concentrations in a Coastal Plain watershed: A multi-scale simulation analysis
Published in
Environmental Pollution, April 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.envpol.2013.12.026
Pubmed ID
Authors

C.D. Knightes, H.E. Golden, C.A. Journey, G.M. Davis, P.A. Conrads, M. Marvin-DiPasquale, M.E. Brigham, P.M. Bradley

Abstract

Mercury is a ubiquitous global environmental toxicant responsible for most US fish advisories. Processes governing mercury concentrations in rivers and streams are not well understood, particularly at multiple spatial scales. We investigate how insights gained from reach-scale mercury data and model simulations can be applied at broader watershed scales using a spatially and temporally explicit watershed hydrology and biogeochemical cycling model, VELMA. We simulate fate and transport using reach-scale (0.1 km(2)) study data and evaluate applications to multiple watershed scales. Reach-scale VELMA parameterization was applied to two nested sub-watersheds (28 km(2) and 25 km(2)) and the encompassing watershed (79 km(2)). Results demonstrate that simulated flow and total mercury concentrations compare reasonably to observations at different scales, but simulated methylmercury concentrations are out-of-phase with observations. These findings suggest that intricacies of methylmercury biogeochemical cycling and transport are under-represented in VELMA and underscore the complexity of simulating mercury fate and transport.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 27 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 21%
Professor 4 14%
Student > Master 4 14%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 3 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 10 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 10%
Engineering 3 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 6 21%

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 15 February 2014.
All research outputs
#11,308,947
of 14,268,610 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Pollution
#3,565
of 5,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,366
of 252,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Pollution
#39
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,268,610 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,967 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 252,139 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.