1. Exposure and Effects Pilot Study Small Fish Mercury Project Ben Greenfield 1, Letitia Grenier 1, Andrew Jahn 2, Seth Shonkoff 1, Mark Sandheinrich 3, Jay Davis 1 1. San Francisco Estuary Institute 2. 1000 Riverside Drive, Ukiah, CA 3. River Studies Center, University of Wisconsin – La Crosse

2. Small Fish Hg Project Background Background Mercury (Hg) in N. California waters a longstanding management concern due to historic mining Mercury (Hg) in N. California waters a longstanding management concern due to historic mining Elevated concentrations in sport fish Elevated concentrations in sport fish San Francisco Estuary site of extensive wetland restoration activity San Francisco Estuary site of extensive wetland restoration activity Sensitive wildlife in region Sensitive wildlife in region

3. Striped bass Hg concentrations in SF Estuary over time For more information on sport fish monitoring, see poster # 27

4. Small Fish Hg Project Goals Goals Characterize food-web mercury at fine spatial and temporal scales Characterize food-web mercury at fine spatial and temporal scales Collect data for wildlife risk evaluations Collect data for wildlife risk evaluations Detect regional trends in bioaccumulation of Hg related to wetland restoration Detect regional trends in bioaccumulation of Hg related to wetland restoration Identify differences in pattern between benthic and pelagic food webs Identify differences in pattern between benthic and pelagic food webs

5. Design Design 8 sites within San Francisco Estuary 8 sites within San Francisco Estuary 4 sites near restoration projects 4 sites near restoration projects 4 index sites near extant marshes 4 index sites near extant marshes Additional samples in deep water Additional samples in deep water Sample benthic and pelagic species at each site Sample benthic and pelagic species at each site Use related types of species to create data sets comparable across a wide range of salinities Use related types of species to create data sets comparable across a wide range of salinities Topsmelt/Mississippi (inland) silversides (Atherinopsidae) Topsmelt/Mississippi (inland) silversides (Atherinopsidae) Arrow goby, cheekspot, and Shimofuri goby (Tridentiger) Arrow goby, cheekspot, and Shimofuri goby (Tridentiger) Bay goby from deep water Bay goby from deep water

6. Design Design Four composites per species per site - allow statistical comparison Four composites per species per site - allow statistical comparison 5-10 individuals/composite 5-10 individuals/composite Minimize covariates by using consistent sizes Minimize covariates by using consistent sizes

11. Coordination with other monitoring Coordination with other monitoring Geographic Geographic EEPS samples bay edge - South, Central and North Bay EEPS samples bay edge - South, Central and North Bay South Bay Salt Pond Hg project samples inside marshes, ponds, and sloughs South Bay Salt Pond Hg project samples inside marshes, ponds, and sloughs CBDA Fish Mercury Project - North Bay, more freshwater focus CBDA Fish Mercury Project - North Bay, more freshwater focus Species Species Intent to produce data set as comparable as possible across region Intent to produce data set as comparable as possible across region

12. Small Fish Hg Project 3

13. Treatment Reference Bay Goby Alviso Slough Newark Slough Bird Island Eden Landing Oakland Middle Harbor China Camp Napa River (no fish caught) Benicia Park IEP1 IEP2

14. Results 97 Composite samples analyzed 97 Composite samples analyzed QA was good QA was good 94% recovery of spiked samples 94% recovery of spiked samples 5% relative standard deviation of triplicate samples 5% relative standard deviation of triplicate samples

16. Pelagic Species Higher

17. Spatial patterns Alviso Slough Newark Slough Bird Island Eden Landing Oakland Middle Harbor China Camp Benicia Park

19. Spatial patterns - silverside Alviso Slough Newark Slough Bird Island Eden Landing China Camp Benicia Park < 50 ng/g 50 – 100 ng/g 100 – 150 ng/g 150 - 200 ng/g >200 ng/g

22. Spatial patterns - gobies Alviso Slough Newark Slough Bird Island Eden Landing China Camp < 10 ng/g 10 – 20 ng/g 20 – 30 ng/g >30 ng/g Oakland Middle Harbor

23. Comparison to fish/wildlife risk thresholds * Tissue concentration dry weight

24. Summary Variation among species Variation among species Mississippi Silverside > Topsmelt > Arrow/Cheekspot Gobies > Bay Goby Mississippi Silverside > Topsmelt > Arrow/Cheekspot Gobies > Bay Goby Variation among stations Variation among stations Alviso Slough generally elevated Alviso Slough generally elevated Southern stations elevated in silversides (Alviso, Newark, Bird Island) Southern stations elevated in silversides (Alviso, Newark, Bird Island)

25. Future Steps Evaluate species selection Evaluate species selection Are we on the right track with chosen species? Are we on the right track with chosen species? Evaluate sample sizes and study design Evaluate sample sizes and study design Power analysis Power analysis Estimate wildlife risk Estimate wildlife risk Long-term trend evaluation Long-term trend evaluation

26. Thanks to… April Robinson Bridget Mooney Cindy Patty Darell Slotten Marco Sigala Dave Crane Sarah Cohen Meg Sedlak Joel Baker Arthur Fong SF Bay National Wildife Refuge California State Parks CA Department Fish & Game