Skip to main content
Log in

Influence of chloride and sediment matrix on the extractability of HgS (cinnabar and metacinnabar) by nitric acid

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The extractability of metacinnabar and cinnabar, alone or in the presence of some sediment components, with various concentrations of HNO3 (1, 4, 6, and 14 M) was studied. Both forms of HgS (0.2–0.3 mg HgS in 10–20 mL of acid) were insoluble in all HNO3 concentrations as pure compounds. The presence of FeCl3 enhanced solubility of both cinnabar and metacinnabar, especially when concentrated HNO3 was used for the extraction. As the same effect was not obtained in the presence of FeOOH, we concluded that chloride and not Fe3+ was responsible for HgS dissolution. In fact, addition of very low chloride concentration to concentrated HNO3 provoked partial (Cl>10−4 M) or even total dissolution (Cl>10−2 M) of HgS. In dilute HNO3 (4–6 M) cinnabar was much less affected by chloride addition than metacinnabar. Extraction of HgS by concentrated HNO3 in the presence of sediment of various salinities demonstrated that the amount of dissolved HgS increased with the increase of the sediment salinity (from freshwater to estuarine and marine sediment), confirming that chloride enhances dissolution of HgS. Removal of chloride by washing the sediment with Milli-Q water significantly reduced dissolution of added HgS during extraction by concentrated HNO3. These results demonstrate that conclusions based on the extraction schemes using concentrated HNO3 as single extractant or as the first extractant in the sequential extraction procedures can be biased. A verification of artifactual oxidation of HgS, when using more concentrated HNO3 as extractant, would help to verify reliability of the applied extraction procedure.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1a–d.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3a,b.
Fig. 4.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Stein ED, Cohen Y, Winer AM (1996) Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 26:1–10

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Davis A, Bloom NS, Que Hee SS (1997) Risk Analysis 17:557–569

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim CS, Brown GE Jr, Rytuba JJ (2000) Sci Total Environ 261:157–168

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Revis NW, Osborne TR, Holdsworth G, Hadden C (1989) Water Air Soil Pollut 45:105–112

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Fabbri D, Lombardo M, Trombini C, Vassura I, Zavoli E, Horvat M (2001) RMZ – Mater Geoenviron 48:186–192

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bloom NS, Preus E, Katon JC, Hiltner M (2003) Anal Chim Acta 479:233–248

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Rodriguez Martin-Doimeadios RC, Wasserman JC, Garcia Bermejo LF, Amouroux D, Berzas Nevado JJ, Donard OFX (2000) J Environ Monitor 2:360–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wallschlager D, Desai MVM, Spengler M, Wilken R-D (1998) J Environ Qual 27:1034–1043

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fabbri D, Gemelli S, Lagnone L, Miserocchi S, Trombini C, Vassura I (2000) Annali di Chimica 91:563–575

    Google Scholar 

  10. Simpson SL, Apte SC, Batley GE (1998) Environ Sci Technol 32:620–625

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Simpson SL, Apte SC, Batley GE (2000) Environ Sci Technol 34:4533–4537

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Burkstaller JE, McCarty PL (1975) Environ Sci Technol 9:676–679

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Personal communication (2002) Sequential extraction data for soil sample obtained from Dr Milena Horvat

  14. Mikac N, Foucher D, Niessen S, Ouddane B, Fischer J-C (2002) Anal Bioanal Chem 374:1028–1033

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mikac N, Niessen S, Wartel M (1999) Analusis 27:870–875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mikac N, Niessen S, Ouddane B, Wartel M (1999) Appl Organomet Chem 3:715–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Barnett MO, Harris LA, Turner RR, Stevenson RJ, Henson TJ, Melton RC, Hoffman DP (1997) Environ Sci Technol 31:3037–3043

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Morse JW, Luther GW III (1999) Geochim Cosmochim Acta 63:3373–3378

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Lamure J, Brusett H (1962) In: Pascal P (ed) Nouveau Traite de Chimie Minerale. Masson, Paris

  20. Biester H, Gosar M, Covelli S (2000) Environ Sci Technol 34:3330–3336

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Birkett JW, Norgen JMK, Lester JN (2002) Environ Pollut116:65–74

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gagnon C, Pelletier E, Mucci A (1997) Mar Chem 59:159–176

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Bayens W, Meuleman C, Muhaya B, Leermarkers M (1998) Hydrobiol 366:63–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The sample of soil (SOIL-1) was prepared in the framework of the IAEA trough the CRP entitled "Health impacts of mercury cycling in contaminated environments studies by nuclear techniques", 1999–2003. This work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of Croatia. Additional funding was from CNRS-PICS 1,250 program, CNRS-PAI Proteus, FEDER Region Nord Pas de Calais (CPER), and PNETOX program. N.M. has benefited grant from the French Government (PAST) and S.L. from CNRS.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nevenka Mikac.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mikac, N., Foucher, D., Niessen, S. et al. Influence of chloride and sediment matrix on the extractability of HgS (cinnabar and metacinnabar) by nitric acid. Anal Bioanal Chem 377, 1196–1201 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-003-2204-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-003-2204-7

Keywords

Navigation