Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Biopsy Procedure for Determining Filet and Predicting Whole-Fish Mercury Concentration

  • Published:
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although mercury contamination of fish is a widespread phenomenon, its regional evaluation is hindered by the reluctance of permitting agencies to grant collection permits, problems in securing adequate freezer space, and time to process whole, large fish or filets. We evaluated mercury concentrations in 210 filet biopsies from 65 sites in 12 western states relative to whole-body mercury concentration in the same fish. We found a highly significant relationship (r2 = 0.96) between biopsy and whole-fish mercury concentrations for 13 piscivorous and nonpiscivorous fish species. We concluded that relative to conventional fish-tissue sampling and analysis procedures for whole fish or filets, the biopsy procedure for mercury in fish tissue is nonlethal, less cumbersome, more likely to be permitted by fisheries agencies, and a precise and accurate means for determining both filet and whole-fish mercury concentrations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • RF Baker PJ Blanchfield MJ Paterson RJ Flett L Wesson (2004) ArticleTitleEvaluation of nonlethal methods for the analysis of mercury in fish tissue Trans Am Fish Soc 133 568–576 Occurrence Handle10.1577/T03-012.1 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXlsVCqsLs%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brumbaugh WG, Krabbenhoft DP, Helsel DR, Wiener JG, Echols KR (2001) A national pilot study of mercury contamination of aquatic ecosystems along multiple gradients: Bioaccumulation in fish. USGS/BRD/BSR—2001–0009, pp 25

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter H (1998) Mercury in the Midwest: State public health agency perspective. In: Mercury in the Midwest: Current status and future directions (EPA/905/R-98/003 research report). United States Environmental Protection Agency, Chicago, IL pp 33–38

  • JV Cizdziel TA Hinners EM Heithmar (2002) ArticleTitleDetermination of total mercury in fish tissues using combustion atomic absorption spectrometry with gold amalgamation Water Air Soil Pollut 135 355–370 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1014798012212 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38Xjt1Gls7k%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • NR Draper H Smith (1998) Applied regression analysis, EditionNumber3 Wiley New York, NY 706

    Google Scholar 

  • WH Everhart AW Eipper WD Youngs (1975) Principles of fishery science Cornell University Press Ithaca, NY 288

    Google Scholar 

  • RM Goldstein ME Brigham JC Stauffer (1995) ArticleTitleComparison of mercury concentrations in liver, muscle, whole bodies, and composites of fish from the Red River of the North Can J Aquat Sci 53 244–252 Occurrence Handle10.1139/f95-203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • AT Herlihy DP Larsen SG Paulsen NS Urquhart (2000) ArticleTitleDesigning a spatially balanced, randomized site selection process for regional stream surveys Environ Monit Assess 63 95–113 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1006482025347 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3cXltFShsL8%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • RH Myers (1990) Classical and modern regression with applications EditionNumber2 PWS-Kent Boston, MA 488

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson E (2000) The analysis of mercury in fish tissue plugs for the purpose of evaluating a potentially non-lethal sampling method. North Dakota Department of Health Report. North Dakota Department of Health, Bismarck, ND, pp 9

  • DV Peck DK Averill JM Lazorchak DJ Klemm (2003a) Field operations and methods for non-wadeable rivers and streams, draft method United States Environmental Protection Agency Corvallis, OR 198

    Google Scholar 

  • DV Peck JM Lazorchak DJ Klemm (2003b) Field operations manual for wadeable streams, draft method United States Environmental Protection Agency Corvallis, OR 255

    Google Scholar 

  • SA Peterson AT Herlihy RM Hughes KL Motter JM Robbins (2002) ArticleTitleLevel and extent of mercury contamination in Oregon, USA, lotic fish Environ Toxicol Chem 21 2157–2164 Occurrence Handle10.1002/etc.5620211019 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XntlGjtLk%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • WE Ricker (1973) ArticleTitleLinear regressions in fishery research J Fish Res Board Can 30 409–434 Occurrence Handle10.1139/f73-072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CJ Schmitt WG Brumbaugh (1990) ArticleTitleNational contaminant biomonitoring program: Concentration of arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, selenium, and zinc in U.S. freshwater fish, 1976–1984 Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 19 731–747 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF01183991 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK3cXlvFOgu70%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • CJ Schmitt SE Finger (1987) ArticleTitleThe effects of sample preparation on measured concentrations of eight elements in edible tissues of fish from streams contaminated by lead mining Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 16 185–207 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF01055800 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaL2sXhtlegtLs%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • RR Sokel FJ Rohlf (1981) Biometry EditionNumber2 WH Freeman New York, NY 859

    Google Scholar 

  • P Sprent GR Dolby (1980) ArticleTitleThe geometric mean functional relationship Biometrics 36 547–550 Occurrence Handle10.2307/2530224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • JK Taylor (1987) Quality assurance of chemical measurements Lewis Publishers Chelsea, MI 329

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsubaki T, Irukayama K, (eds) (1977) Minamata disease: Methylmercury poisoning in Minamata and Nigata, Japan Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 317

    Google Scholar 

  • InstitutionalAuthorNameUnited States Environmental Protection Agency (1997) Environmental monitoring and assessment program: Integrated quality assurance project plan for surface waters research activities, section 2 data quality objectives (pp 13-22) United States Environmental Protection Agency Corvallis, OR 139

    Google Scholar 

  • InstitutionalAuthorNameUnited States Environmental Protection Agency (1998) Mercury in solids and solutions by thermal decomposition, amalgamation, and atomic absorption spectrophotometry, draft method 7473 United States Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • InstitutionalAuthorNameUnited States Geological Survey (1989) Digital line graphs from 1:100,000-scale maps; Users guide 2 United States Geological Survey Reston, VA 88

    Google Scholar 

  • B Waddell T May (1995) ArticleTitleSelenium concentrations in the razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus): Substitution of non-lethal muscle plugs for muscle tissue in contaminant assessment Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 28 321–326 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00213109 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK2MXltFegt7w%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • JG Weiner DJ Spry (1996) Toxicological significance of mercury in freshwater fish WN Beyer GH Heinz AW Redmon-Norwood (Eds) Environmental contaminants in wildlife: Interpreting tissue concentrations Lewis Boca Raton, FL 297–339

    Google Scholar 

  • JH Williamson (1992) Colorado squawfish genetic survey—Tissue sampling protocol 1992 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Fisheries and Federal Aid, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 12

    Google Scholar 

  • R Wydoski L Emery (1983) Tagging and marking LA Nielsen DL Johnson (Eds) Fisheries techniques American Fisheries Society Bethesda, MD 215–237

    Google Scholar 

  • RB Yeardley SuffixJr JM Lazorchak SG Paulsen (1998) ArticleTitleElemental fish tissue contamination in northeastern U.S. lakes: Evaluation of an approach to regional assessment Environ Toxicol Chem 17 1875–1884 Occurrence Handle10.1002/etc.5620170931 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK1cXlslGrtbs%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The USEPA funded this research as part of the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program supported by Contract No. 68D01005 with Dynamac Corporation. Mention of commercial products in this article does not constitute endorsement by the USEPA. This article was submitted to the USEPA’s peer and administrative review and approved for publication. We thank several people who assisted with the preparation of this paper: M. Hails-Avery, K. Baxter, W. Brumbaugh, R. Hjort, J. Lazorchak, F. McCormick, K. Motter, S. Pierson, C. Schmitt, and anonymous reviewers whose comments helped considerably in the final preparation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Western Ecology Division, National Health and Ecological Effects Research Laboratory, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, Oregon, 97333, USA

    S. A. Peterson & J. Van Sickle

  2. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 97333, USA

    R. M. Hughes

  3. Dynamac, Corvallis, Oregon, 97333, USA

    J. A. Schacher & S. F. Echols

Authors
  1. S. A. Peterson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Van Sickle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. M. Hughes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. A. Schacher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. F. Echols
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. A. Peterson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Peterson, S.A., Van Sickle, J., Hughes, R.M. et al. A Biopsy Procedure for Determining Filet and Predicting Whole-Fish Mercury Concentration. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 48, 99–107 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-004-0260-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-004-0260-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation