Key factor and mechanism of abiotic methylation of mercury in contaminated soil in Chongqing, China
Lei Wang 1
Zhenhui Gong 1
Yanlin Yu 1
RuiYi Gan 1
Xiaojiang Li 1
Jiansheng Huang 1✉ Email
1 School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering Chongqing University of Science and Technology 401331 Chongqing China
Lei Wang1, Zhenhui Gong1,Yanlin Yu1, RuiYi Gan1, Xiaojiang Li1, Jiansheng Huanga*
1 School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chongqing University of Science and Technology, Chongqing, 401331, China.
Corresponding author’s email: huangjiansheng703@163.com
Key factor and mechanism of abiotic methylation of mercury in contaminated soil in Chongqing, China
Abstract
Mercury methylation was consisted of biotic and abiotic methylation in nature, which play decisive roles in the geochemical cycle of mercury and its compounds. The abiotic methylation has been deeply studied to the gene level, but the abiotic methylation mechanism of mercury is still unclear. This paper analyzed condition and key factors of abiotic methylation of mercury, mechanism of abiotic methylation was comprehensively expounded by electron distribution, hybridization, electronegativity and free radical theory. The corrin-like coenzyme methylcobalamin was an efficient methyl donor, and the effect of pH on the mercury abiotic methylation was the greatest. The initial mercury concentration of 500mg/L, pH = 5 and temperature 35°C were the optimal parameters for yielding methylmercury, which is the most unfavorable conditions to the nature. The abiotic methylation of mercury conforms to the second-order reaction kinetic model. Compared with solution, soil will reduce the rate and yield of abiotic methylation. The mechanism of abiotic methylation reaction of mercury should be the coexistence of carbanion transfer and methyl radical reaction.
Key words:
mercury
abiotic
methylation mechanism
electron distribution
hybridization
free radical theory
1. Introduction
Mercury pollution attracts considerable attentions on the impact mechanism on the environment especially for its methylation behavior and it poses reverse effects on crop growth and creature survival(Huang et al. 2025). It is worth noting that methylmercury is easily bioaccumulated and biomagnified through the food chain that influences humanity healthy(Ray et al. 2025; Peterson et al. 2025). Furthermore, mercury and its derivatives combine with thiol groups of organisms, affecting metabolism and inhibiting the normal division of cells or even causing chromosomal variation, thus that pose a potential threat to the habitat(An et al. 2024).
Mercury methylation has been classified as biotic and abiotic methylation, of which the biotic methylation is dominant in nature(Peng et al. 2024). Biotic methylation mainly depends on biological metabolites (methyl vitamin B12 and methane) in vivo and vitro of microorganisms. Sulfate-reducing, iron-reducing bacteria, methanogens and syntrophs are the main kinds of microorganisms that methylated the inorganic mercury, and the environmental conditions affect the mercury methylation by changing the activity of the methylating microorganisms(Gilmour et al. 2018,Mahbub et al. 2017; Du et al. 2019), as well as the chemical form and bioavailability of mercury(Eckley and Hintelmann 2006). To date, the researches on mercury biological methylation focus on the transformation mechanism of mercury at the gene level. Zhang et al. (2023) proved that the two genes hgcA and hgcB belong to functional genes controlling mercury biotic methylation. The biotic methylation pathway is: ① microbial cells took up Hg2+ through active transport; ② mercury ions in the cytoplasm are methylated; ③ cells release methylmercury.
It is generally believed that the methylation reaction is mainly involved in biotic methylation of the microorganism or its extracellular secretions.(Gilmour et al. 2018,
(Mahbub et al. 2017; Du et al. 2019) Methylmercury has been found in low-temperature (below 4°C) swamps not suitable for microorganisms, which prove the existence of abiotic methylation in the environment. Therefore, abiotic methylation is widespread in all lakes(Eckley and Hintelmann 2006). The researches on abiotic methylation have been limited to the analysis of abiotic methylation conditions. Methyl iodide, methyl tin, methylcobalamin, L-cysteine, EDTA, citric acid and small molecules of fulvic acid can be ideal methyl donors, and abiotic methylation may be affected by organic and inorganic ligand in soil(Zhang et al. 2023).
There are still a lot of controversies over the process of abiotic methylation. Some researchers thought that the methylation between Hg2+ and methylcobalamin generates MeHg (methylmercury) and then converts to DMHg (ethylmercury). Methylmercury has been mainly produced under acidic conditions, while ethyl mercury forms under neutral or alkaline conditions. Some research considered the methylation involved in Hg2+ all generated ethyl mercury, but its instability quickly decomposed to methyl mercury, thus the existence of ethyl mercury could not be detected (Zhang et al. 2012).The reaction pathway of abiotic methylation is still inconclusive, and the transformation mechanism and conditions need to be further explored. Therefore, this work helps improve our understanding of the key factors and fill the gaps in abiotic methylation mechanism.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Soil sampling and characters
Surface soil was collected in the upwind of a mercury-related enterprises located in the southwest China (Xiushan County, Chongqing) by random sampling method. The fresh soil sample was collected into sterilized plastic bags and immediately stored in a freezer at 4°C. After on-site sampling, soil samples were sent to the laboratory immediately to conduct the following analysis. Mercury content was analyzed by CV-AAS (Shimadzu AA-6300C, Japan) and methylmercury was determined by GC (Shimadzu GC-2010PLUS, with an alkyl mercury special chromatography column from Sino Chemical Co., Ltd., Japan) with a solvent extraction technique. The water, soil and containers used in the experiment were all sterilized at 121°C. The basic physical and chemical properties of soil sample were shown in Table 1:
Table 1
Basic physical and chemical properties of soil
pH
OM/%
CEC/ mol·kg− 1
bulk density/g·cm− 3
moisture content/%
5.73
7.43
6.23
1.35
26.39
2.2. Key factors of abiotic methylation
Abiotic methylation is ubiquitous in nature, and most chemical reactions are solution reactions, so the research on the factors to abiotic methylation was applied in liquid phase. Oscillation balance method was applied to simulate the process of abiotic methylation. Acetic acid, methanol, humic acid, and methylcobalamin (MeB12) were selected as methyl donors and added to the mercury solution (CHg = 500mg/L), and the concentration of methylation donors was 200mg/L. The effects of solution pH on the abiotic methylation process were conducted under the condition of the pH at 3–10, 500 mg/L Hg2+ and 200 mg/L methyl donors. Besides, the effects of reaction temperatures on mercury abiotic methylation were performed at 25°C, 30°C, 35°C, 40°C, 45°C, and 50°C, respectively.
Initial mercury concentrations (100, 300 and 500 mg/L), pH (3, 5 and 7) and reaction temperatures (25, 35 and 45℃) were selected as the three main factors of influencing methylation to perform orthogonal experiments.
2.3. Kinetics of abiotic methylation
Methylcobalamin was added to 500 mg/L HgCl2 solution with a concentration of 200 mg/L. The mixed solution was magnetically stirred at 25°C, and 10 ml of which were taken at 1, 5, 10, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180 and 240 minutes to measure the methylmercury content, and the abiotic methylation reaction rate were calculated by kinetic equation fitting.
2.4. Effect of soil and light to abiotic methylation
Five grams of the sterilized soil were placed in a centrifuge tube, and 5ml of methylcobalamin in HgCl2 solution was added to make the mercury concentration in the soil at 500mg/kg and methylcobalamin concentration at 200mg/kg. The prepared soils were placed in a 25°C constant temperature incubator for light and dark cultivation respectively in order to simulate the effect of surface soil and deep soil on mercury abiotic methylation. Samples were taken at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 days to measure the methylmercury content in the soil after freeze-drying.
2.5. Statistical analysis and cartography
Orthogonal experiments and range analysis were applied to determine the degree of influence of different factors on abiotic methylation reaction. The kinetic reaction equation fitting and cartography were applied by software version Origin 2018.
3. Result and discussion
3.1. Methyl donor screening
The yields of methylmercury produced under different methyl donor conditions are shown in Table 2.
Table 2
Concentration of methylmercury transferred by different methyl donors
Methyl donor
Acetic acid
Methanol
Humic acid
Methylcobalamin
Content of methylmercury
1.23
5.37
0.22
447.62
Acetic acid, methanol, humic acid, and methylcobalamin (MeB12) were selected as methyl donors for abiotic methylation of inorganic mercury. The methylation ability of methylcobalamin was obviously higher than the other methyl donors due to having the most yield of methylmercury which reached 447.62µg. By contrast, the humic acid had the lowest methylation ability, and the content of methylmercury production was only 0.22µg. Among the four ethyl donors, the order of their methylation ability was: methylcobalamin > methanol > acetic acid > humic acid.
Methylcobalamin is a corrin-like coenzyme and ubiquitous in soil. It could be assimilated by methanogens in methane synthesis (Qin et al. 2018), which plays a vital role in soil ecosystems. In the molecular structure of methylcobalamin, cobalt is in the active center of methylcobalamin, the fifth ligand is DMBI (dimethylbenzimidazole) nucleotides, and the sixth ligand is -CH3, thereby forming a Co-C coordination bond (Kumar and Kozlowski 2017).In the corrin ring structure of methylcobalamin, all atoms are not in the same plane, so its rigidity is weak and easy to change the conformation. Thus, the Co-C coordination bond is unstable, and its methyl groups easily split and separate. The methyl group derived from methylcobalamin combined with Hg2+ to form methylmercury. The C-C bonds of humic acid, acetic acid, and methanol belong to covalent bonds compared with methylcobalamin, thus the bond energy exceeded the Co-C bond with low capacity of -CH3 separation so that the methylation efficiency was much less than methylcobalamin. In addition to the methyl group, humic acid also contains a large number of carboxyl, hydroxyl, and methoxy groups. The ability to bind mercury was stronger than methanol and acetic acid. In addition, the C-C bond energy was slightly higher than the C-O bond, resulting in the methylation capacity of methanol was slightly higher than acetic acid.
3.2. Effect of pH on the methylation process
pH not only affected the solubility of metal ions in solution, but also the ion activities. The effect of pH on the abiotic methylation of mercury is shown in Figture 1:
Click here to Correct
Figture 1 Effect to abiotic methylation by pH
The yields of methylmercury were kept constant at pH ≤ 4, and the methylation efficiency increased at pH 4 ~ 5. At pH = 5, the methylmercury generation was the most, and the methylation production reached 47.4 mg/L. When pH > 6, the concentration of methylmercury decreased sharply, and the methylation rate decreased to 0.16% at pH = 10. Under acidic conditions, the mercury ion is highly active so that it easily reacted with the methyl group dissociated from methylcobalamin to form methylmercury. However, under strong acid conditions, methylcobalamin lied in the Base-off state, the Co-N bond made the Co-C bond more stable, which made no obvious effect on the methylation when the pH ≤ 4. Whereas, methylcobalamin is most stable in a weak acid environment (pH = 4.5 ~ 5.0). If the pH is too high or too low, it can decompose and reduce the methylation efficiency. Therefore, at pH = 5, methylmercury in solution was the highest concentration. It was worth noting that red methylcobalamin crystals precipitated in the solution under basic conditions, and as the pH increased, the precipitated crystals increased, thus the methyl donors effectively participating in the methylation reaction in the solution decreased. Therefore, the concentration of methylmercury decreased sharply under alkaline conditions. Meanwhile, the amount of OH- in the solution increased, which caused Hg(OH)2 precipitation and reduced the activity of Hg2+ in the solution. This is also the main reason for the decrease of methylcobalamin methyl capacity under alkaline conditions.
3.3. Effect of temperature on abiotic methylation
The methylmercury yields in the solution under different temperature conditions are shown in Figture 2:
Click here to Correct
Figture 2 Effect to methylation by tempreture
As can be seen from Figture 2, the yields of methylmercury increased before and then decreased with reaction temperatures. The methylmercury generation gradually increased from 25 to 35°C. As mentioned earlier, the efficiency of methylation in the soil in summer was higher than that in winter, and the temperature had a significant effect on the methylation process. However, when the temperature was above 35°C, the changing trend of methylmercury generation was opposite, which may be due to the evaporation of mercury in the solution at high temperature causing the decrease of methylation efficiency.
3.4. Analysis of conditions affecting abiotic methylation
Orthogonal experiments were applied to select the optimal parameters for abiotic methylation, and find the most unfavorable conditions for yielding methylmercury. The orthogonal data obtained are shown in Table 3 and Figture 3:
Click here to Correct
Table 3
Chart of orthogonal analysis
Group
CHg
pH
Tempreture
Blank
CMeHg (mg/L)
1
100
3
25
1
38.46
2
100
5
35
2
43.52
3
100
7
45
3
24.56
4
300
3
35
3
41.18
5
300
5
45
1
36.23
6
300
7
25
2
34.75
7
500
3
45
2
39.61
8
500
5
25
3
43.04
9
500
7
35
1
38.55
K1
106.54
119.26
116.26
113.24
 
K2
112.16
122.79
123.25
117.88
 
K3
121.21
97.87
100.40
108.79
 
k1
35.51
39.75
38.75
37.75
 
k2
37.39
40.93
41.08
39.29
 
k3
40.40
32.62
33.47
36.26
 
R
4.89
8.31
7.62
3.03
 
Figture 3 Trend chart of concentration of methylmercury in different condition in orthogonal
Range analysis shows that R values of the three factors were above the control group (3.03), indicating that the initial mercury concentration, pH, and temperature affected the abiotic methylation process. Among these, the R value of pH was the largest (8.31), revealing that compared with the initial mercury concentration and temperature, the effect pH on the abiotic methylation process was the most remarkable. According to the k and R values of these three factors, the optimal parameters for methylmercury yield were the initial mercury concentration of 500mg / L, pH = 5 and temperature of 35°C, respectively. Thus, the most unfavorable condition to the ecological environment should avoid the above reaction parameters during daily production and life in order to reduce the abiotic methylation reaction in the environment. The screening of the three influencing conditions is consistent with the results obtained by single-factor experiments.
3.5. Effect of reaction time on abiotic methylation
The kinetic of the abiotic methylation reaction of mercury with methylcobalamin in solution over time is shown in Figture 4:
Click here to Correct
Figture 4 Effect to methylation process by time
The methylmercury generation rate increased sharply before 15 min, and the reaction rate gradually decreased at 15–20 minutes, then the methylation reached dynamic equilibrium. The methylation rate was 3.09% at 1 minute, and the methylation rate increased rapidly to 4.37% at 15 minutes. The kinetic experiment measured the equilibrium concentration of methylmercury in the abiotic methylation reaction at 44.05mg/L.
In previous literatures, the methylation of mercury belong to pseudo first-order kinetic reaction (Hu et al. 2013; Imla Syafiqah and Yussof 2018), and the reaction formula is as follows:
1
Integrating formula (1), the linear expression is:
2
Where CMeB12 is the initial methylcobalamin concentration (mg/L); CMeHg is the methylmercury concentration (mg/L); k and a are the reaction constant. Since CMeHg increases with time, (CMeB12-CMeHg)/CMeB12 is 0–1 and gradually decreases with time, the slope of the linear fitting curve should be negative. The linear expression obtained by linear fitting of the data is
, and the correlation coefficient is 0.8130.
The second-order reaction kinetic equation was used to further simulate the experimental data. The second-order reaction kinetic equation is as follows:
3
Where k is the reaction rate constant in mg/(L*min); Ce is the maximum concentration of methylmercury generated by abiotic methylation reaction (mg/L). Integrating formula (3), the linear expression is:
4
From formula (4), the second-order reaction kinetic model can be transformed into a linear equation of t/C against time. The second-order reaction kinetic equation of mercury methylation is t/C = 0.022t+0.005, and the correlation coefficient is as high as 0.9999. The maximum amount of generated methylmercury Ce in the reaction was determined to be 45.45 mg/L, and the reaction rate constant k was at 0.097 mg/(L*min). Therefore, the second-order reaction kinetic model rather than the pseudo-first-order reaction kinetic model can better fit the abiotic methylation process of mercury in solution, and the correlation coefficient was 0.9999.
3.6. Effects of soil and light on abiotic methylation
Figture 5 shows the amount of soil methylmercury generation from simulated topsoil and deep soil under constant light and dark conditions.
Click here to Correct
Figture 5 Production of methylmercury in light and darkness in soil
Experts thought that the methylation reactions mostly occur in anaerobic environment (Kaschak et al. 2014), but in this work, simulate experiments proved that abiotic methylation in soil can be under aerobic conditions. Under the light and dark conditions, the yields of methylmercury in the soil gradually increased with time. The amount of methylmercury in the soil added with methylcobalamin was significantly higher than that in the soil without methylcobalamin. The yield of methylmercury was 8.56 times that of the soil without methylcobalamin under light condition, indicating that methylcobalamin was an efficient abiotic methylation donor. Regardless that, the presence of organic matter such as humus in the soil combined with Hg2+ to form methylmercury, but the highest methylation rate was only 0.082%, which was far lower than the biological methylation efficiency. By contrast, the methylmercury yield was 5.47 times that of the soil without methylcobalamin under dark condition, which was below the yield of light condition, revealing that light can promote abiotic methylation to produce methylmercury.
The amount of methylmercury produced in the soil was significantly higher than that in the dark culture and its yields in the light was 1.61 times that in the dark at 10 days. Under the condition of ultraviolet irradiation, small molecules aldehydes, ketones and acids can complete abiotic methylation reaction with Hg2+ through intra-molecular alkyl transfer (Diao et al. 2018). Research found that the amount of methylmercury generated in aqueous solutions under sunlight was higher than in non-irradiated conditions, and the conclusions of this study are similar to the above results (Pacyna 2020).
The rate of change of methylmercury under light and dark conditions gradually decreased with time. According to the two-point model, when a high-concentration mercury solution enters the soil environment, Hg2+ was firstly adsorbed by the soil colloid with a high binding site. Point-adsorbed mercury ions were difficult to desorb. However, mercury ions bound to low binding sites and free mercury ions can undergo abiotic methylation reactions with methylcobalamin. The highest abiotic methylation rate in the soil was only 0.70%, which is far lower than in aqueous solution. Furthermore, the abiotic methylation time in the soil was longer than that of the solution reaction, indicating that the soil environment had a lagging effect on the abiotic methylation reaction of mercury. Therefore, the adsorption of mercury on soil significantly affects the abiotic methylation reaction of mercury in the soil, which will reduce the abiotic methylation rate in the soil and prolong the reaction process.
3.7. Abiotic methylation mechanism
Inorganic mercury generated methylmercury through abiotic methylation reaction with methyl donors (eg. methylcobalamin). The molecular structure of methyl donor methylcobalamin is shown in Figture 6.
Click here to Correct
Figture 6 Illustrative structural diagrams of methylcobalamin
Methylcobalamin is an octahedral structure with a cobalt (III) center, containing a corrin ring, a fifth ligand DMBI (dimethylbenzimidazole) and a sixth ligand which is methyl. Therefore, methylcobalamin is a rare metal-alkyl bond-containing compound that occurs naturally. All atoms of its corrin ring are not in the same plane so that its structure is fragile and its conformation is easy to change. The stability of methylcobalamin is affected not only by the sixth ligand but also by the fifth ligand DMBI. The existence of DMBI accelerates the separation of Co-C bond. Crystallographic data shows that the interaction of DMBI and the corrin ring results in an upward distortion of the corrin ring, creating a spatially unnatural corrin ring. When another ligand presented, the opposite repulsion caused the corrin ring deformation from the unstable state to the stable state and the corrin ring generated a force that splits the Co-C bond. The structural change of the corrin ring transfer the tension to the Co-C bond and trigger the subsequent bond elongation and fracture. After the Co-C bond is broken, the relaxed state of the corrin ring disappears, and then returns to the "bent up" structure. The overall structure of the alkyl ligand is unstable because of its simple structure and no negatively charged oxygen atoms. The activation of methylcobalamin was reflected in the change of the sixth axial ligand.
A
The effect of the sixth ligand on the structural transformation of the fifth ligand is to reduce the spatial compression of the alpha carbon, thus the Co-N bond under the condition of strong acidification (Base-off) will make the Co-C bond more stable. In the natural environment, methylcobalamin is often on the "Base-on" state, and its structural strength is weaker than under strong acid conditions. Hence, it can explain that methylcobalamin has the highest methylation efficiency at pH = 5. Carbon-cobalt binds were in the form of coordination bonds. Hg2+ electrophilically attacked the carbon-cobalt bond to cause it to split and generate carbanion and hydroxycobalamin. Carbanion combined with Hg2+ to form CH3Hg+. Based on electron distribution and hybrid theory, Co is d2sp3 hybrid, thus methylcobalamin is an outer orbital complex. The outermost electron pair of Co and the outermost electron pair of C formed a coordination bond, and Hg2+ was used as an electrophile. When attacking methylcobalamin, mercury ions first combined with the Co-C bond to form a π complex, and then transitions to an intermediate (σ ligand). When the electrophilic performance of the electrophile is greater than that of the corrin ring, it will compete for carbanions (CH3) to form methylmercury. In terms of electronegativity, five of the six ligands of Co in methylcobalamin were connected by Co-N bonds and one is connected by Co-C bonds. The electronegativity of N is higher than C, and Co-N bonds is higher than that of Co-C bonds, so that the binding with Co is more stable. The first thing that Hg2+ electro-aggressively attacks methylcobalamin is Co-C bonds.
Another possible abiotic methylation pathway is methyl radical transfer. The Co-C bond of methylcobalamin is unstable and can generate methyl radicals under conditions such as light and heat. Methyl radicals are sp2 hybrids, and it can form a near-plane configuration with an unpaired single electron which is located in the p orbit with a dissociation energy of 104 kcal/mol, that is very active and easily reacts with other substances. Hg2+ is the loss of two electrons in the 6s orbit of the Hg atom. It has strong electrophilic properties and can combine with methyl radicals to form methylmercury. The above experiments proved that carbanion transfer and methyl radical reaction should occur simultaneously in the abiotic methylation reaction of mercury.
4. Conclusion
Over the abiotic methylation process, the corrin-like coenzyme methylcobalamin was an efficient methyl donor. Under strong acid conditions, the abiotic methylation rate of mercury did not change much, and the amount of methylmercury produced was the largest under weak acid conditions (pH = 5). Among the factors that affect the abiotic methylation of mercury, the effect of pH on the mercury abiotic methylation was the greatest. The initial mercury concentration of 500mg/L, pH = 5 and temperature 35°C were the optimal parameters for yielding methylmercury, which is the most unfavorable conditions to the nature. The abiotic methylation of mercury conforms to the second-order reaction kinetic model. The maximum amount of methylmercury Ce is 45.45mg/L, the reaction rate constant k = 0.097 mg/(L*min), and the correlation coefficient is as high as 0.999. Light can promote the abiotic methylation reaction. The abiotic methylation process in soil was longer than that in solution. Based on electron distribution, hybridization theory, electronegativity theory and free radical theory, the mechanism of abiotic methylation reaction of mercury should be the coexistence of carbanion transfer and methyl radical reaction.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the Experimental Center of School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chongqing University of Science and Technology.
A
Author Contribution
Lei Wang and Zhenhui Gong: Designed the experiments, writing – original draft, formal analysis, writing review and editing. Yanlin Yu, RuiYi Gan and Xiaojiang Li: Completion of the main experiment, data analysis and formal analysis. Jiansheng Huang: Methodology.
Consent for publication
Agree.
Consent for participate
Informed consent
was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
A
Data Availability
The data are given in the paper.
Disclosure
statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
A
Funding
This research did not receive any specific external funding. This work was supported by Scientific Research Project of Chongqing University of Science ༆ Technology [grant number: 20220042] and Research Project of Chongqing Municipal Human Resources and Social Security Bureau [grant number: 20220079].
Ethical approval
All applicable institutional and/or national guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding this submission.
Reference
Huang, Y., Huang, Y., Reinfelder, J. R., Zhong, H., Fang, L., Liu, C., & Li, F. (2025). Phenol–quinone redox couples of natural organic matter promote mercury methylation in paddy soil. Environmental Science & Technology, *59*(2), 1179–1188. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.4c07397.
Ray, S., Vashishth, R., Mukherjee, A. G., Gopalakrishnan, A. V., & Sabina, E. P. (2025). Mercury in the environment: Biogeochemical transformation, ecological impacts, human risks, and remediation strategies. Chemosphere, *381*, 144471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2025.144471.
Peterson, B. D., Janssen, S. E., Poulin, B. A., Ogorek, J. M., White, A. M., McDaniel, E. A., Marick, R. A., Armstrong, G. J., Scheel, N. D., Tate, M. T., Krabbenhoft, D. P., & McMahon, K. D. (2025). Sulfate reduction drives elevated methylmercury formation in the water column of a eutrophic freshwater lake. Environmental Science & Technology, *59*(13), 6799–6811. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.4c12759.
An, Y., Li, B., Yu, Y., Zhou, Y., Yi, J., Li, L., Sun, Y., Qiang, Z., Liu, Y., & Wang, P. (2024). A rapid and specific fluorescent probe based on aggregation-induced emission enhancement for mercury ion detection in living systems. Journal of Hazardous Materials, *465*, 133331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.133331.
Peng, X., Yang, Y., Yang, S., He, L., Wang, Y., & Chen, G. (2024). Recent advance of microbial mercury methylation in the environment. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, *108*(1), 235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-023-12967-6.
A
Hao, Z., Zhao, L., Liu, J., Pu, Q., Chen, J., Meng, B., & Feng, X. (2024). Relative importance of aceticlastic methanogens and hydrogenotrophic methanogens on mercury methylation and methylmercury demethylation in paddy soils. Science of the Total Environment, *906*, 167601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167601.
A
Luo, H., Cheng, Q., He, D., Sun, J., Li, J., & Pan, X. (2023). Recent advances in microbial mercury methylation: A review on methylation habitat, methylator, mechanism, and influencing factor. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, *170*, 286–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2022.12.007.
A
Wang, Y.-L., Ikuma, K., Brooks, S. C., Varonka, M. S., & Deonarine, A. (2024). Non-mercury methylating microbial taxa are integral to understanding links between mercury methylation and elemental cycles in marine and freshwater sediments. Environmental Pollution, *346*, 123573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2024.123573.
A
Pu, Q., Meng, B., Huang, J.-H., Zhang, K., Liu, J., Liu, Y., Abdelhafiz, M. A., & Feng, X. (2025). Dissolved organic matter fosters core mercury-methylating microbiomes for methylmercury production in paddy soils. Biogeosciences, *22*, 1543–1556. https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1543-2025.
A
Parks, J. M., Johs, A., Podar, M., Bridou, R., Hurt Jr., R. A., Smith, S. D., Tomanicek, S. J., Qian, Y., Brown, S. D., Brandt, C. C., Palumbo, A. V., & S. J. T. M. D. W. M. D. L. R. S. (2013). The genetic basis for bacterial mercury methylation. Science, *339*, 1332–1335. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1230667.
Gilmour, C. C., Bell, J. T., Bullock, A. S., Riedel, G., Kopec, D. A., & Bodaly, R. A. (2018). Distribution and biogeochemical controls on net methylmercury production in Penobscot River marshes and sediment. Science of The Total Environment, *640–641*, 555–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.05.276.
Mahbub, K. R., Bahar, M. M., Labbate, M., Krishnan, K., Andrews, S., Naidu, R., & Megharaj, M. (2017). Bioremediation of mercury: not properly exploited in contaminated soils! Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, *101*(3), 963–976. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-016-8072-9.
Du, H., Ma, M., Igarashi, Y., & Wang, D. (2019). Biotic and abiotic degradation of methylmercury in aquatic ecosystems: A review. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, *102*(5), 605–611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00128-019-02593-2.
Eckley, C. S., & Hintelmann, H. (2006). Determination of mercury methylation potentials in the water column of lakes across Canada. Science of The Total Environment, *368*(1), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.09.089.
Zhang, D., Xiang, Y., Liu, G., Liang, L., Chen, L., Shi, J., Yin, Y., Cai, Y., & Jiang, G. (2023). Mechanism and controlling factors on rapid methylmercury degradation by ligand-enhanced Fenton-like reaction at circumneutral pH. Chemosphere, *324*, 138291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.138291.
Zhang, Y., Sun, R., Ma, M., & Wang, D. (2012). Study of inhibition mechanism of NO3- on photoreduction of Hg(II) in artificial water. Chemosphere, *87*(2), 171–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.12.022.
Qin, C., Chen, M., Yan, H., Shang, L., Yao, H., Li, P., & Feng, X. (2018). Compound specific stable isotope determination of methylmercury in contaminated soil. Science of The Total Environment, *644*, 406–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.365.
Kumar, M., & Kozlowski, P. M. (2017). Electronic and structural properties of Cob(I)alamin: Ramifications for B₁₂-dependent processes. Coordination Chemistry Reviews, *333*, 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2016.11.006.
Hu, H., Lin, H., Zheng, W., Tomanicek, S. J., Johs, A., Feng, X., Elias, D. A., Liang, L., & Gu, B. (2013). Oxidation and methylation of dissolved elemental mercury by anaerobic bacteria. Nature Geoscience, *6*(9), 751–754. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1898.
Imla Syafiqah, M. S., & Yussof, H. W. (2018). Kinetics, isotherms, and thermodynamic studies on the adsorption of mercury (II) ion from aqueous solution using modified palm oil fuel ash. Materials Today: Proceedings, *5*(10), 21690–21697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2018.07.011.
Kaschak, E., Knopf, B., Petersen, J. H., Bings, N. H., & König, H. (2014). Biotic methylation of mercury by intestinal and sulfate-reducing bacteria and their potential role in mercury accumulation in the tissue of the soil-living Eisenia foetida. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, *69*, 202–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.10.030.
Diao, X., Yuan, C.-G., Wu, J., Gui, B., Zhang, K., & Zhang, C. (2018). Mercury release and fraction transformation during desulfurization gypsum aging process (UV irradiation). Fuel, *217*, 522–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.12.111.
Pacyna, J. M. (2020). Recent advances in mercury research. Science of The Total Environment, *738*, 139955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139955.
Total words in MS: 3881
Total words in Title: 15
Total words in Abstract: 165
Total Keyword count: 6
Total Images in MS: 5
Total Tables in MS: 3
Total Reference count: 23