Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27093907›Full record

ReviewThe Science of the total environment2016

Avian mercury exposure and toxicological risk across western North America: A synthesis.

Joshua T Ackerman, Collin A Eagles-Smith, Mark P Herzog, C Alex Hartman, Sarah H Peterson, David C Evers, Allyson K Jackson, John E Elliott, Stacy S Vander Pol, Colleen E Bryan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Science of the total environment, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed
17.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

63 citing papers in PubMed, 300 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Joshua T AckermanU.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, Dixon Field Station, 800 Business Park Drive, Suite D, Dixon, California 95620, United States. Electronic address: jackerman@usgs.gov.
Collin A Eagles-SmithU.S. Geological Survey, Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, Oregon, 97331, United States.
Mark P HerzogU.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, Dixon Field Station, 800 Business Park Drive, Suite D, Dixon, California 95620, United States.
C Alex HartmanU.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, Dixon Field Station, 800 Business Park Drive, Suite D, Dixon, California 95620, United States.
Sarah H PetersonU.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, Dixon Field Station, 800 Business Park Drive, Suite D, Dixon, California 95620, United States.
David C EversBiodiversity Research Institute, 276 Canco Road, Portland, Maine, 04103, United States.
Allyson K JacksonOregon State University, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, 104 Nash Hall, Corvallis, Oregon, 97331, United States.
John E ElliottEnvironment Canada, Science and Technology Branch, Pacific Wildlife Research Centre, Delta, British Columbia, V4K 3N2, Canada.
Stacy S Vander PolNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Chemical Sciences Division, Hollings Marine Laboratory, 331 Fort Johnson Road, Charleston, South Carolina, 29412, United States.
Colleen E BryanNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Chemical Sciences Division, Hollings Marine Laboratory, 331 Fort Johnson Road, Charleston, South Carolina, 29412, United States.
Western Ecological Research CenterNational Institute of Standards and Technology · USBiodiversity Research Institute · USEnvironment and Climate Change Canada · CAOregon Department of Fish and Wildlife · USUnited States Geological Survey · US

Funding

Intramural NIST DOC 9999-NIST
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Methylmercury contamination of the environment is an important issue globally, and birds are useful bioindicators for mercury monitoring programs. The available data on mercury contamination of birds in western North America were synthesized. Original data from multiple databases were obtained and a literature review was conducted to obtain additional mercury concentrations. In total, 29219 original bird mercury concentrations from 225 species were compiled, and an additional 1712 mean mercury concentrations, representing 19998 individuals and 176 species, from 200 publications were obtained. To make mercury data comparable across bird tissues, published equations of tissue mercury correlations were used to convert all mercury concentrations into blood-equivalent mercury concentrations. Blood-equivalent mercury concentrations differed among species, foraging guilds, habitat types, locations, and ecoregions. Piscivores and carnivores exhibited the greatest mercury concentrations, whereas herbivores and granivores exhibited the lowest mercury concentrations. Bird mercury concentrations were greatest in ocean and salt marsh habitats and lowest in terrestrial habitats. Bird mercury concentrations were above toxicity benchmarks in many areas throughout western North America, and multiple hotspots were identified. Additionally, published toxicity benchmarks established in multiple tissues were summarized and translated into a common blood-equivalent mercury concentration. Overall, 66% of birds sampled in western North American exceeded a blood-equivalent mercury concentration of 0.2 μg/g wet weight (ww; above background levels), which is the lowest-observed effect level, 28% exceeded 1.0 μg/g ww (moderate risk), 8% exceeded 3.0 μg/g ww (high risk), and 4% exceeded 4.0 μg/g ww (severe risk). Mercury monitoring programs should sample bird tissues, such as adult blood and eggs, that are most-easily translated into tissues with well-developed toxicity benchmarks and that are directly relevant to bird reproduction. Results indicate that mercury contamination of birds is prevalent in many areas throughout western North America, and large-scale ecological attributes are important factors influencing bird mercury concentrations.

Indexed as

AnimalsBirdsCanadaDatabases, FactualEnvironmental MonitoringEnvironmental PollutantsGeographic Information SystemsMethylmercury CompoundsMidwestern United StatesModels, BiologicalNorthwestern United StatesRisk AssessmentSouthwestern United StatesSpecies SpecificityTissue DistributionEnvironmental PollutantsMethylmercury CompoundsBioaccumulationBirdsEggsMercuryToxicity Benchmarks

Identifiers

PMID27093907
PMCPMC5365029
OpenAlexW2341775751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.