Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of Potentially Nonlethal Sampling Methods for Monitoring Mercury Concentrations in Smallmouth Bass (Micropterus dolomieu)

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

Abstract

We evaluated three potentially nonlethal alternatives to fillet sampling for the determination of mercury (Hg) concentrations in smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu). Fish (n = 62, 226–464 mm total length) from six sites in southern Missouri were captured by electrofishing. Blood samples (1 mL) from each fish were obtained by caudal veinipuncture with a heparinized needle and syringe. Biopsy needle (10 mm × 14 gauge; three cuts per fish; 10–20 mg total dry weight) and biopsy punch (7 mm × 5 mm in diameter, one plug per fish, 30–50 mg dry weight) samples were obtained from the area beneath the dorsal fin. Fillet samples were obtained from the opposite side of the fish. All samples were freeze-dried and analyzed for total Hg by combustion amalgamation atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Mean relative standard deviations (RSDs) of triplicate samples were similar for all four methods (2.2–2.4%), but the range of RSDs was greater for blood (0.4–5.5%) than for the muscle methods (1.8–4.0%). Total Hg concentrations in muscle were 0.0200–0.8809 μg/g wet weight; concentrations in plug, needle, and fillet samples from each fish were nearly identical. Blood Hg concentrations were 0.0006–0.0812 μg/mL and were highly correlated with muscle concentrations; linear regressions between log-transformed blood and fillet Hg concentrations were linear and statistically significant (p < 0.01), and explained 91–93% of the total variation. Correlations between fillet Hg concentrations and fish size and age were weak; together they explained ≤37% of the total variation, and the relations differed among sites. Overall, any of the alternative methods could provide satisfactory estimates of fillet Hg in smallmouth bass; however, both blood and plug sampling with disposable instruments were easier to perform than needle sampling. The biopsy needle was the most difficult to use, especially on smaller fish, and its relative expense necessitates reuse and, consequently, thorough cleaning between fish to prevent cross-contamination.

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

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ASIH, AFS, AIFRB (2004) Guidelines for use of fishes in field research. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD. Available from http://www.fisheries.org/html/Public_Affairs/Sound_Science/Guidelines2004.shtml)

  • Baker RF, Blanchfield JP, Paterson MJ, Flet RJ, Wesson L (2004) Evaluation of nonlethal methods for the analysis of mercury in fish tissue. Trans Am Fish Soc 133:568–576

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blaxhall PC, Daisley KW (1973) Routine hematological methods for use with fish. J Fish Biol 5:771–781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bracewell P, Cowx IG, Uglow RF (2004) Effects of handling and electrofishing on plasma glucose and whole blood lactate of Leuciscus cephalatus. J Fish Biol 64:65–71

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Braley H, Anderson TA (1992) Changes in the blood metabolite concentrations in response to repeated capture, anesthesia, and blood sampling in the golden perch, Macquaria ambigua. Comp Biochem Physiol 103A:445–450

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Breazile JE, Zinn LL, Yauk JC, Mass HJ, Wollscheid J (1982) A study of haematological profiles of channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus (Rafinesque). J Fish Biol 21:305–309

    Article  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. Biological Sciences Report USGS/BRD/BSR-2001-0009. US Geological Survey, Reston, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • Brumbaugh WG, Schmitt CJ, May TW (2005) Concentrations of cadmium, lead, and zinc in fish from mining-influenced waters of Northeastern Oklahoma: sampling of blood, carcass, and liver for aquatic biomonitoring. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 49:76–88

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cabana G, Tremblay A, Kalff J, Rasmussen JB (1994) Pelagic food chain structure in Ontario lakes: a determinant of mercury levels in lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 51:381–389

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cizdziel J, Hinners T, Cross C, Pollard J (2003) Distribution of mercury in the tissues of five species of freshwater fish from Lake Mead, USA. J Environ Monit 5:802–807

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cizdziel JV, Hinners TA, Heithmar EM (2002a) Determination of total mercury in fish tissues using combustion atomic absorption spectrometry with gold amalgamation. Water Air Soil Pollut 135:355–370

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cizdziel JV, Hinners TA, Pollard JE, Heitmar EM, Cross CL (2002b) Mercury concentrations in fish from Lake Mead, USA, related to fish size, condition, trophic level, location, and consumption risk. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 43:309–317

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford BA, Leider SA, Tipping JM (1977) Technique for rapidly taking samples of skeletal muscle from live adult steelhead trout. Prog Fish-Cult 39:125

    Google Scholar 

  • Franson JC, Schmutz JA, Creekmore LH, Fowler CA (1999) Concentrations of selenium, mercury, and lead in blood of emperor geese in western Alaska. Environ Toxicol Chem 18:965–969

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gale N, Adams CD, Wixson BF, Loftin KA, Huang Y-W (2004) Lead, zinc, copper, and cadmium in fish from and sediments from the Big River and Flat River Creek of Missouri’s Old Lead Belt. Environ Geochem Health 26:37–49

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gremillion PT, Cizdziel JV, Cody NR (2005) Caudal fin mercury as a non-lethal predictor of fish-muscle mercury. Environ Chem 2:96–99

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton SJ, Holley KM, Buhl KJ, Bullard FA, Weston LK, McDonald SF (2004) Evaluation of flushing of a high-selenium backwater channel in the Colorado River. Environ Toxicol 19:51–81

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hightower JM, Moore D (2003) Mercury levels in high-end consumers of fish. Environ Health Perspect 111:604–608

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman R, Lommel R (1984) Effects of repeated blood sampling on some blood parameters in freshwater fish. J Fish Biol 24:245–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jearld A Jr (1983) Age determination. In Nielsen LA, Johnson DL (eds) Fisheries techniques. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD, pp 301–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Lake JL, Ryba SA, Servst JR, Libby AD (2006) Mercury in fish scales as an assessment method for predicting muscle tissue mercury concentrations in largemouth bass. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 50:539–544

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leitner JK, Isely JJ (1994) A liver and muscle biopsy technique for electrophoretic evaluation of largemouth bass. Prog Fish-Cult 56:288–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May JT, Hothem RL, Alpers CN, Law MA (2000) Mercury bioaccumulation in fish in a region affected by historic gold mining: the South Yuba River, Deer Creek, and Bear River watersheds, California, 1999. Open-File Report 00-367. US Geological Survey, Sacramento, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy DH, Stevenson JP, Roberts MS (1973) Some blood parameters of the rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri Richardson). I. The Kamloops variety. J Fish Biol 5:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menau KJ (1997) Big River watershed inventory and assessment. Missouri Department of Conservation, Cape Girardeau, MO (viewed online 07/31/2006 at http://www.mdc.mo.gov/fish/watershed/big/contents/20cotxt.htm; last modified 11/08/2001)

  • Miller SM, Wilkerson TF Jr (2000) Eleven Point River watershed inventory and assessment. Missouri Department of Conservation, West Plains, MO (viewed online 04/05/2006 at http://www.mdc.mo.gov/fish/watershed/elevenpt/contents/090ctxt.htm; last modified 02/01/2001)

  • MDC (Missouri Department of Conservation) (2006) Missouri species and communities of conservation concern checklist. Natural Heritage Program, Jefferson City, MO

    Google Scholar 

  • MDHSS (Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services) (2006) 2006 Fish advisory. A guide to eating fish in Missouri. Jefferson City, MO. Available from http://www.dhss.state.mo.us/NewsAndPublicNotices/05FishAdvisory.pdf

  • Mueller KW, Serdar DM (2002) Total mercury concentrations among fish and crayfish inhabiting different trophic levels in Lake Whatcom, Washington. J Freshwater Ecol 17:621–633

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Neumann RM, Ward SM (1999) Bioaccumulation and biomagnification of mercury in two warmwater fish communities. J Freshwater Ecol 14:487–497

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Peles JD, Glenn TC, Brant HA, Wall AK, Jagoe CH (2006) Mercury concentrations in largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) from five South Carolina reservoirs. Water Air Soil Pollut 173:151–162

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen JC, Adamski MC, Bell RW, Davis JV, Femmer SR, Freiwald DA, Joseph RL (1998) Water quality in the Ozark plateus, Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma, 1992–95. Circular 1158. US Geological Survey, Reston, VA

  • Peterson SA, Herlihy AT, Hughes RM, Motter KL, Robbins JM (2002) Level and extent of mercury contamination in Oregon, USA, lotic fish. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:2157–2164

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson SA, Van Sickle J, Hughes RM, Schacher JA, Echols SF (2005) A biopsy procedure for determining filet and predicting whole-fish mercury concentration. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 48:99–107

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Probst WE, Rabeni CF, Covington WG, Marteney RE (1984) Resource use by stream-dwelling rock bass and smallmouth bass. Trans Am Fish Soc 113:283–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabeni CF (1992) Trophic linkage between stream centrarchids and their crayfish prey. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 49:1714–1721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt CJ, Blazer VS, Dethloff G, Tillitt DE, Gross TS, DeWeese LR, Smith SB, Goede RW, Bartish TA, Kubiak TJ (1999) Biomonitoring of Environmental Status and Trends (BEST) Program: Field procedures for assessing the exposure of fish to environmental contaminants. Biological Resources Division, Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD-1999-0007. US Geological Survey, Columbia, MO

  • Schmitt CJ, Finger SE (1987) The effects of sample preparation on the measured concentrations of eight elements in the edible tissues of fish contaminated by lead mining. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 16:185–207

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stafford CP, Haines TA (1997) Mercury concentrations in Maine sport fishes. Trans Am Fish Soc 126:144–152

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stafford CP, Haines TA (2001) Mercury concentration and growth rate in two piscivore populations. Environ Toxicol Chem 20:2099–2101

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ullrich SM, Tanton TW, Abdrahitova SA (2001) Mercury in the aquatic environment: a review of factors affecting methylation. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 31:241–293

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) (2000) Guidelines for assessing chemical contaminant data for use in fish consumption advisories. Volume 2: Risk assessment and fish consumption limits, 3rd ed. EPA-823-B-00-008. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) (2001) Mercury update: impact on fish advisories. EPA-823-F01-011. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) (2004) Origin of the 1 meal/week noncommercial fish consumption rate in national advisory for mercury. Technical Memorandum, March 11, 2004. Office of Water, National Fish and Wildlife Contamination Program, Washington, DC. Available from http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/fishadvice/advice.html

  • Uthe JF (1971) A simple field technique for obtaining small samples of muscle from living fish. J Fish Res Bd Can 28:1203–1204

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddell B, May T (1995) Selenium 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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ward SM, Neumann RM (1999) Seasonal variations in concentrations of mercury in axial muscle tissue of largemouth bass. North Am J Fish Mgmt 19:89–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitledge G, Hayward RS, Zweifel RD, Rabeni CF (2003) Development and laboratory evaluation of a bioenergetic model for subadult and adult smallmouth bass. Trans Am Fish Soc 132:316–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitledge G, Rabeni C (1997) Energy sources and ecological role of crayfishes in an Ozark stream: insights from stable isotope and gut analyses. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 54:2555–2563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiener JG, Krabbenhoft DP, Heinz GH, Scheuhammer AM (2002) Ecotoxicology of mercury. In: Hoffman DJ, Rattner BA, Burton GA Jr, Cairns J Jr (eds) Handbook of ecotoxicology, 2nd ed, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, pp 409–463

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Park-Oriented Biological Support project, a partnership between the USGS Inventory and Monitoring Program and the NPS, and by the USGS Contaminants Biology Program. Fish were collected under the supervision of J. Ackerson, D. Mayer, R. Legler, and M. Reed (MDC). M. McKee (MDC) coordinated the collections and provided unpublished MDC monitoring data. V. Grant, M. Gossett, J. Luraas, and E. Kunz (all NPS), and M. Mac, J. Besser, B. Poulton, and S. Olson (all USGS-CERC) assisted in the field. T. May, J. Arms, S. Koppi, and V. Melton (all USGS-CERC) assisted in the laboratory. Scales were prepared and read by W. Simpson and D. Noltie (University of Missouri-Columbia) and by J. Dekoske (MDC). T. May, M. Brigham, and D. Tillitt (all USGS) reviewed earlier versions of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. US Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research Center, 4200 New Haven Road, Columbia, MO, 65201, USA

    C. J. Schmitt & W. G. Brumbaugh

Authors
  1. C. J. Schmitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. W. G. Brumbaugh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. J. Schmitt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schmitt, C.J., Brumbaugh, W.G. Evaluation of Potentially Nonlethal Sampling Methods for Monitoring Mercury Concentrations in Smallmouth Bass (Micropterus dolomieu). Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 53, 84–95 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-006-0214-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-006-0214-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation