NISTIR 7872 

SEABIRD TISSUE ARCHIVAL AND MONITORING PROJECT: 

Egg Collections and Analytical Results for 2006-2009 

Stacy S. Vander Pol1 

Paul R. Becker1 

Sylvain Berail2 

Rusty D. Day1 

Olivier F.X. Donard2 

Keith A. Hobson3 

Amanda J. Moors1 

Rebecca S. Pugh1 

Lauren B. Rust1 

David G. Roseneau4 

http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.7872 

3

Environment Canada 

1

U.S. Department of Commerce Stable Isotope Hydrology and Ecology 

National Institute of Standards and Technology Research Laboratory 

Material Measurement Laboratory 11 Innovation Blvd. 

Analytical Chemistry Division Saskatoon, SK 27N 3H5 Canada 

Hollings Marine Laboratory 

Charleston, SC 29412 

2

 Institut Pluridisciplinaire de Recherche sur 4U.S. Department of the Interior 

l’Environnement et les Materiaux, Equipe de U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Chimie Analytique BioInorganique et Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge 

Environnement, UMR CNRS 5254 Homer, AK 99603 

64053 Pau, France 
 

NISTIR 7872 

SEABIRD TISSUE ARCHIVAL AND MONITORING PROJECT: 

Egg Collections and Analytical Results for 2006-2009 

Stacy S. Vander Pol1 Paul R. Becker1 

Sylvain Berail2 Rusty D. Day1 

Olivier F.X. Donard2 Keith A. Hobson3 

Amanda J. Moors1 Rebecca S. Pugh1 

Lauren B. Rust1 David G. Roseneau4 

1

U.S. Department of Commerce 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Material Measurement Laboratory 

Analytical Chemistry Division 

Hollings Marine Laboratory 

Charleston, SC 29412 

2

 Institut Pluridisciplinaire de Recherche sur l’Environnement et les Materiaux 

Equipe de Chimie Analytique BioInorganique et Environnement 

UMR CNRS 5254 

64053 Pau, France 

3

Environment Canada 

Stable Isotope Hydrology and Ecology Research Laboratory 

11 Innovation Blvd. 

Saskatoon, SK 27N 3H5 Canada 

4

U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge 

Homer, AK 99603 

http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.7872 

July 2012 

U.S. Department of Commerce 

Rebecca Blank, Acting Secretary 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Patrick D. Gallagher, Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director 
Table of Contents 

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iv
 

List of Figures................................................................................................................................ iv
 

List of Appendices .......................................................................................................................... v
 

Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ ix
 

Disclaimer ...................................................................................................................................... ix
 

Abbreviations.................................................................................................................................. x
 

Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... xi
 

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
 

METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 3
 

Study Area and Sampling Sites ................................................................................................... 3
 

Sample Collecting, Processing, and Banking ............................................................................. 9
 

Mercury and Hg, Carbon , and Nitrogen Isotopes ...................................................................... 9
 

Total Hg Levels....................................................................................................................... 9
 

Hg Isotopes ........................................................................................................................... 12
 

Carbon and Nitrogen Stable Isotopes ................................................................................... 15
 

Statistics ................................................................................................................................ 15
 

Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)........................................................................................ 15
 

Sample Preparation ............................................................................................................... 15
 

GC/MS Analyses .................................................................................................................. 17
 

Statistics ................................................................................................................................ 18
 

RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................... 18
 

Mercury (Hg) and Hg, Carbon (C), and Nitrogen (N) Isotopes................................................ 18
 

Taxonomic Groupings .......................................................................................................... 18
 

Taxonomic Comparisons of Hg Levels and δ15N and δ13C .................................................. 19
 

ii 
Regional Comparisons of Hg Levels and δ15N and δ13C...................................................... 22
 

Hg Isotopes ........................................................................................................................... 25
 

Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)........................................................................................ 30
 

QA/QC and General Results................................................................................................. 30
 

Regional Comparisons.......................................................................................................... 32
 

Species Comparisons ............................................................................................................ 32
 

Temporal Comparisons ......................................................................................................... 32
 

DISCUSSION............................................................................................................................... 38
 

Mercury (Hg) and Hg, Carbon (C), and Nitrogen (N) Isotopes................................................ 38
 

Taxonomic Comparisons of Hg Levels and δ15N and δ13C .................................................. 38
 

Regional Comparisons of Hg Levels and δ15N and δ13C...................................................... 39
 

Hg Isotopes ........................................................................................................................... 41
 

Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)........................................................................................ 46
 

General Results ..................................................................................................................... 46
 

Regional Comparisons.......................................................................................................... 46
 

Species Comparisons ............................................................................................................ 47
 

Temporal Comparisons ......................................................................................................... 49
 

CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................................... 51
 

Mercury and Hg, Carbon, and Nitrogen Isotopes ..................................................................... 51
 

Persistent Organic Pollutants .................................................................................................... 52
 

RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................. 52
 

LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................. 53
 

iii 
List of Tables 

Table 1. The 2008-2009 Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring Project (STAMP) seabird egg 

collecting sites................................................................................................................................. 5
 

Table 2. Clutches of seabird eggs banked by the Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring Project 

Table 5. Quality control sample mercury isotope values compared to previously reported 

Table 7. Correlations between major contaminants and carbon and nitrogen isotope ratios found 

(STAMP) in the Marine Environmental Specimen Bank in Charleston, SC.................................. 6
 

Table 3. Hg measurements of QC04-ERM1 Egg Reference Material 1 and blanks .................... 11
 

Table 4. Murre eggs from representative colonies that were analyzed for Hg isotopes ............... 13
 

measurements ................................................................................................................................ 14
 

Table 6. Mass fractions of of major contaminants in murre and gull eggs ................................... 35
 

in common murre and glaucous gull eggs collected in 2008-2009 ............................................. 48
 

List of Figures 

Figure 1. The 2006-2009 Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring Project (STAMP) seabird egg 

collecting sites................................................................................................................................. 4
 

Figure 3. The 13 nesting locations in the Norton Sound – Bering Strait study area where murre 

Figure 4. Hg levels in common murre and thick-billed murre eggs from St. Lawrence (northern 

Figure 5. Hg isotope patterns in common murre and thick-billed murre eggs from St. Lawrence 

Figure 2. General location of the Norton Sound – Bering Strait study area ................................... 7
 

and gull eggs were collected in 2008-2009..................................................................................... 8
 

Bering Sea) and St. Lazaria (southern Gulf of Alaska) islands .................................................... 20
 

(northern Bering Sea) and St. Lazaria (southern Gulf of Alaska) islands .................................... 20
 

Figure 6. Hg levels in murre and gull eggs among regions .......................................................... 21
 

Figure 7. δ15N in murre and gull eggs among regions .................................................................. 23
 

Figure 8. δ13C in murre and gull eggs among regions .................................................................. 23
 

Figure 9. Hg, δ15N, and δ13C in gull eggs compared among colonies .......................................... 24
 

Figure 10. δ200Hg and δ199Hg vs. δ202Hg for all murre and gull eggs showing measured values 

relative to theoretical values based on mass dependent kinetic isotope fractionation. ................. 26
 

iv 
Figure 11. A three Hg isotope diagram showing colony separations by their Δ199Hg vs δ202Hg 

signatures ...................................................................................................................................... 27
 

Figure 12. Hg, MIF, and MDF gradients between the Norton Sound and northern Bering Sea 

regions........................................................................................................................................... 28
 

Figure 13. δ15N and δ13C gradients between the Norton Sound and northern Bering Sea regions
 

....................................................................................................................................................... 29
 

Figure 14. Slope of the linear regression between Δ199Hg and Δ201Hg ........................................ 30
 

Figure 15. Percent lipid in common murre, thick-billed murre, glaucous gull and glaucouswinged gull eggs collected at 19 Alaskan colonies in 2008-2009. ............................................... 31
 

Figure 16. Geographic comparisons for common murre eggs collected from Bering Sea and 

Norton Sound regions, and glaucous gull eggs collected from Chukchi Sea, Bering Sea, and 

Norton Sound regions. .................................................................................................................. 33
 

Figure 17. Principal components analyses for organochlorine pesticides and polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCBs) in common murre, thick-billed murre, glaucous gull, and glaucous-winged gull 

eggs collected at 19 Alaskan colonies in 2008-2009.................................................................... 34
 

Figure 18. Temporal comparisons for St. Lazaria Island common murre and thick-billed murre 

eggs and St. George thick-billed murre eggs ................................................................................ 37
 

Figure 19. Principal components analyses for organic compounds, mercury, and stable carbon 

and nitrogen isotopes in common murre, thick-billed murre, glaucous gull, and glaucous-winged 

gull eggs collected at 19 Alaskan colonies in 2008-2009 ............................................................. 50
 

List of Appendices 

Appendix 1. A typical egg collecting kit used to mail supplies and safely transport murre and 

gull eggs for this study.................................................................................................................. 61
 

Appendix 2. Murre and gull egg samples banked in the Marine ESB in Charleston, South 

Carolina, that were used for polybrominated diphenyl ether, polychlorinated biphenyl, 

organochlorine pesticide, total mercury, and carbon and nitrogen stable isotope analyses ......... 62
 

Appendix 3. Hg levels and stable δ15N, δ13C isotopes in murre and gull eggs ............................. 65
 

Appendix 4. Hg isotopes measured in common and thick-billed murre eggs .............................. 70
 

Appendix 5. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in murre egg control material
 

compared to consensus values and maximum limits of detection ................................................ 73
 

Appendix 6. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass-fractions in murre 

egg control material compared to consensus values and maximum limits of detection ............... 74
 

v 
Appendix 7. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in unidentified murre eggs 

collected at Cape Lisburne, Alaska in 2009.................................................................................. 76
 

Appendix 8. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in thick-billed murre eggs 

collected at Little Diomede Island, Alaska in 2008 ...................................................................... 77
 

Appendix 9. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in common murre eggs collected 

at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska in 2008......................................................................................... 78
 

Appendix 10. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in thick-billed murre eggs
 

collected at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska in 2008 ......................................................................... 79
 

Appendix 11. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in common murre eggs 

collected at Sledge Island, Alaska in 2008 ................................................................................... 80
 

Appendix 12. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in common murre eggs 

collected at Bluff, Alaska in 2008................................................................................................. 81
 

Appendix 13. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in common murre eggs 

collected at Cape Denbigh, Alaska in 2009 .................................................................................. 82
 

Appendix 14. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in thick-billed murre eggs
 

collected at St. Paul Island, Alaska in 2009.................................................................................. 83
 

Appendix 15. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in thick-billed murre eggs
 

collected at St. George Island, Alaska in 2008 ............................................................................. 84
 

Appendix 16. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in common murre eggs 

collected at St. George Island, Alaska in 2009 ............................................................................. 85
 

Appendix 17. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in common murre eggs 

collected at St. Lazaria Island Alaska in 2008.............................................................................. 86
 

Appendix 18. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in thick-billed murre eggs
 

collected at St. Lazaria Island Alaska in 2008.............................................................................. 87
 

Appendix 19. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at the Kukpuk River delta, Alaska in 2008 ................................................................................... 88
 

Appendix 20. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at Shishmaref Inlet Alaska in 2008 ............................................................................................... 89
 

Appendix 21. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at Brevig Mission, Alaska in 2009................................................................................................ 90
 

Appendix 22. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at the Sinuk River delta, Alaska in 2008 ....................................................................................... 91
 

vi 
Appendix 23. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at Safety Sound, Alaska in 2008 ................................................................................................... 92
 

Appendix 24. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at Bluff, Alaska in 2008................................................................................................................ 93
 

Appendix 25. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at Carolyn Island, Alaska in 2008................................................................................................. 94
 

Appendix 26. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at Cape Darby, Alaska in 2008 ..................................................................................................... 95
 

Appendix 27. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at Shaktoolik, Alaska in 2008 ....................................................................................................... 96
 

Appendix 28. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at Shaktoolik, Alaska in 2009 ....................................................................................................... 97
 

Appendix 29. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous gull eggs collected 

at Stuart Island, Alaska in 2009 .................................................................................................... 98
 

Appendix 30. Lipids and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions in glaucous-winged gull eggs 

collected at Aiktak Island, Alaska in 2009 ................................................................................... 99
 

Appendix 31. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

unidentified murre eggs collected at Cape Lisburne, Alaska in 2009 ........................................ 100
 

Appendix 32. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in thickbilled murre eggs collected at Little Diomede Island, Alaska in 2008 ....................................... 102
 

Appendix 33. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

common murre eggs collected at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska in 2008 ..................................... 104
 

Appendix 34. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in thickbilled murre eggs collected at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska in 2008 .......................................... 106
 

Appendix 35. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

common murre eggs collected at Sledge Island, Alaska in 2008 ............................................... 108
 

Appendix 36. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

common murre eggs collected at Bluff, Alaska in 2008 ............................................................. 110
 

Appendix 37. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

common murre eggs collected at Cape Denbigh, Alaska in 2009 .............................................. 112
 

Appendix 38. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

common murre eggs collected at St. Paul Island, Alaska in 2009 .............................................. 114
 

vii 
Appendix 39. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in thickbilled murre eggs collected at St. George Island, Alaska in 2008 .............................................. 116
 

Appendix 40. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

common murre eggs collected at St. George Island, Alaska in 2009 ......................................... 118
 

Appendix 41. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

common murre eggs collected at St. Lazaria Island, Alaska in 2008 ......................................... 120
 

Appendix 42. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in thickbilled murre eggs collected at St. Lazaria Island, Alaska in 2008 .............................................. 122
 

Appendix 43. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at the Kukpuk River delta, Alaska in 2008 ................................... 124
 

Appendix 44. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Shishmaref Inlet, Alaska in 2008 .............................................. 126
 

Appendix 45. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Brevig Mission, Alaska in 2009 ............................................... 128
 

Appendix 46. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at the Sinuk River delta, Alaska in 2008 ...................................... 130
 

Appendix 47. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Safety Sound, Alaska in 2008 ................................................... 132
 

Appendix 48. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Bluff, Alaska in 2008 ................................................................ 134
 

Appendix 49. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Carolyn Island, Alaska in 2008 ................................................. 136
 

Appendix 50. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Cape Darby, Alaska in 2008 ..................................................... 138
 

Appendix 51. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Shaktoolik South, Alaska in 2008 ............................................. 140
 

Appendix 52. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Shaktoolik South, Alaska in 2009 ............................................. 142
 

Appendix 53. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Stuart Island, Alaska in 2009 .................................................... 144
 

Appendix 54. Brominated diphenyl ether and polychlorinated biphenyl mass fractions in 

glaucous-winged gull eggs collected at Aiktak Island, Alaska in 2009 ..................................... 146
 

viii 
Acknowledgements 

We would like to thank Sandy Tahbone and Eric (Bill) Trigg, Kawerak Inc., Nome, for 

coordinating the Norton Sound – Bering Strait egg collecting efforts, and receiving, storing, and 

shipping the eggs to Homer. Their help was instrumental in the project’s success. We would also 

like to thank the following people for collecting eggs in 2006-2009: Archie Adam (Brevig 

Mission), Arthur Ahkinga (Diomede), Austin Ahmasuk (Nome), Jane Dolliver (University of 

Washington), Jack Fagerstrom (Golovin), Andrew Foxie, Sr. (Stebbins), Dylan Iya (Savoonga), 

Clyde Jackson (Shaktoolik), Dwayne Johnson, Sr. (Unalakleet), Elijah Lane (Point Hope), Eric 

Larson (Nome), Nick Lekanof (St. George), Allyson Larned (USFWS-AMNWR), Peter Lekanof 

(St. George), Peter Lockuk, Sr. (Togiak), Jack Lorrigan (Sitka), Rob Macdonald (USFWSAMNWR), Andy Malavansky (St. George), Gary Merculief (St. George), Mike McClintock 

(USFWS-AMNWR), Rachael Orben (USFWS-AMNWR), Albert Paimiut (Hooper Bay), Julia 

Parrish (University of WA), Monica Parsons (USGS-BRD), Slade Sapora (USFWS-AMNWR), 

Leslie Slater (USFWS-AMNWR), T. Sparks, (Nome), Nick Tanape, Sr. (Nanwalek), Stanley 

Tocktoo (Shishmaref), Greg Thomson (USFWS-AMNWR), Lily Tuzroyluke (Point Hope), Tim 

Van Nus (USGS-BRD), Norman Vlasoff (Tatilek), Brandon Waghiyi (Savoonga) and several 

unidentified residents of Point Hope. The project could not have been conducted without their 

help. We would also like to thank Stephen Long and Michele Schantz (NIST) and Tom Van Pelt 

(NPRB) for their critical review of this report. North Pacific Research Board Project 822 funded 

part of this study. 

Disclaimer 

Any mention of commercial products is for information only; it does not imply recommendation 

or endorsement by NIST. 

ix 
 

 

C 

Abbreviations 

AMAP Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme
 

ANOVA Analysis of Variance
 

BFR Brominated flame retardant
 

Carbon 

CH2Cl2; DCM Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride) 

CFIRMS Continuous flow isotope ratio mass spectrometry 

CM Control material 

COMU Common murre, Uria aalge 

DDD Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane 

DDE Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene 

DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane 

DOC Dissolved organic carbon 

EI Electron impact 

ESB Environmental Specimen Bank 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

GC Gas chromatography 

GLGU Glaucous gull, Larus hyperboreus 

GWGU Glaucous-winged gull, Larus glaucescens 

HBCDD Hexabromocyclododecane 

HCB Hexachlorobenzene 

HCH Hexachlorocyclohexane 

HCl Hydrochloric acid 

HDBP Halogenated dimethyl bypyrrole 

Hg Mercury 

HNO3 Nitric acid 

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency 

ID-CV-ICPMS Isotope dilution cold vapor inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry 

iHG Inorganic mercury 

IPREM Institut Pluridisciplinaire de Recherche sur l’Environnement et les Materiaux 

LOD Limit of detection 

LOQ Limit of quantitation 

LN2 Liquid nitrogen 

MANOVA Multivariate analysis of variance 

MDF Mass dependent fractionation 

MeHg Monomethylymercury 

MIF Mass independent fractionation 

MS Mass spectrometry 

N Nitrogen 

NCI Negative chemical ionization 

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology 

NPRB North Pacific Research Board 

OC Organic carbon 

PBDE Polybrominated diphenyl ether 

PC Principal component 

PCA Principal components analysis 

PCB Polychlorinated biphenyl 

PFE Pressurized fluid extraction 

POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants 

PTV Programmed temperature vaporization 

RSD Relative standard deviation 

SEC Size exclusion chromatography 

SIHERL Stable Isotope Hydrology and Ecology Research Laboratory 

SIM Selected ion monitoring 

SnCl2 Tin chloride 

x 
 

 

SPE Solid phase extraction 

SRM Standard reference material 

STAMP Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring Project 

TBMU Thick-billed murre, Uria lomvia 

THg Total mercury 

Tl Thallium 

TOC Total organic carbon 

UAMN University of Alaska Museum of the North 

UNMU Unidentified murre, Uria spp. 

USFWS-AMNWR United States Fish and Wildlife Service - Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge 

VPDB Vienna Pee Dee Belemni 

Abstract 

Since 1999, the Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring Project (STAMP) has collected, 

banked, and analyzed seabird eggs using established protocols to monitor chlorinated pesticides, 

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), brominated flame retardants, and mercury in Alaska’s marine 

environments. In 2006 and 2008-2009, 594 clutches of murre and gull eggs were obtained and 

banked at the Marine Environmental Specimen Bank, National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST), using established protocols. During 2008-2010, 118 of the clutches from 13 

Norton Sound – Bering Strait seabird colonies and 6 other nesting locations in the Bering and 

Chukchi seas and Gulf of Alaska were analyzed by NIST at the Hollings Marine Laboratory, 

Charleston, South Carolina for mercury and persistent organic pollutants. Mercury isotope 

analyses were run at the Equipe de Chimie Analytique BioInorganique et Environnement facility 

in Pau, France, and the Stable Isotope Hydrology and Ecology Research Laboratory in 

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, ran stable carbon and nitrogen isotope analyses. Most bromated flame 

retardants were below detection limits. Polychlorinated biphenyl levels in the Norton Sound 

murre eggs were similar to levels found at other colonies in the region, but total mercury and 

some chlorinated pesticides were higher, compared to these locations. Most contaminant levels 

in Norton Sound gull eggs were also higher, but some chlorinated pesticides and polychlorinated 

biphenyls were lower, compared to the other colonies. Mercury and stable carbon and nitrogen 

isotope gradients indicated that Norton Sound has a unique mercury regime that is related to 

terrestrial sources of this metal. Mass independent fractionation is lower at northern latitudes, 

where sea-ice cover inhibits photoreduction of mercury, but it was also low in Norton Sound and 

the northern Bering Sea, indicating that ice was not the only factor influencing mercury 

fractionation patterns in these regions. 

xi 
Introduction 

The Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring Project (STAMP) is a collaborative, long-term 

program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge 

(USFWS-AMNWR) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to monitor 

persistent organic pollutants (POPs), mercury, and other contaminants in Alaskan marine 

environments using seabird eggs. The purpose of STAMP is to monitor long-term trends in 

environmental quality by (1) collecting seabird tissues (primarily eggs) at seabird colonies 

without inadvertently contaminating them, (2) processing and banking the samples under 

conditions that ensure chemical stability during long-term (decadal) storage, and (3) analyzing 

subsamples of the stored material for anthropogenic contaminants. (see Roseneau et al. 2008 

for more project history details). Eggs, collected using established protocols (Rust et al. 2010), 

are shipped to AMNWR’s laboratory in Homer, Alaska, where the contents are removed, 

homogenized, and transferred to labeled Teflon and polypropylene containers before being frozen 

and shipped to NIST’s Marine Environmental Specimen Bank (Marine ESB) at the Hollings 

Marine Laboratory in Charleston, South Carolina, for long-term (decadal) storage in stainless steel 

liquid nitrogen (LN2) vapor freezers at -150 oC. Dried egg shells are sent to the University of Alaska 

Museum of the North (UAMN) in Fairbanks, Alaska, for safekeeping. 

In 2002, STAMP received North Pacific Research Board (NPRB) funding to analyze a series of 

previously banked murre (Uria spp.) and gull (Larus spp.) eggs from several colonies in the 

Bering and Chukchi seas and Gulf of Alaska for chlorinated pesticides, polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs; a group of brominated flame 

retardants or BFRs), organotins (butyltins), and mercury (Hg). The 2002 study (NPRB Project 

534) found relatively high levels of Hg in common murre (U. aalge) eggs from three Norton 

Sound colonies (Sledge Island, Bluff, and Cape Denbigh) and differences in organic 

contaminant patterns in this northeastern Bering Sea region (Roseneau et al. 2008). 

Murre and gull eggs are important dietary items in northwestern Alaska, where residents of the 

region traditionally harvest and consume large numbers of them annually (Ahmasuk and Trigg 

2007; A. Ahmasuk, pers. comm.). For example, in 1995, people living in Nome collected at 

least 7,404 murre and 1,259 gull eggs, and people living in Brevig Mission, White Mountain, 

and Unalakleet harvested 2,533 gull eggs (see the Alaska Department of Fish and Game 

Subsistence Division Community Subsistence Information System web site at 

http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/sb/CSIS/index.cfm). 

Given the high Hg levels found in Norton Sound during NPRB Project 534 and the importance 

of murre and gull eggs to residents of the area, there was a need to obtain more information on 

the distribution this potentially harmful contaminant in the region. The current study, 

implemented in 2008, was designed to expand common murre and glaucous gull (Larus 

hyperboreus) egg sampling activities in and near Norton Sound; analyze the eggs for Hg, 

chlorinated pesticides, PCBs, and BFRs (PBDEs); investigate Hg isotope patterns throughout 

the region; and test the hypotheses that: 1) Hg levels in Norton Sound common murre eggs 

were high and relatively consistent over time; 2) Hg levels in Norton Sound glaucous gull eggs 

were higher than those found outside this region; 3) Norton Sound Hg isotope patterns differed 

from more distant nesting locations; and 4) POP levels in Norton Sound murre and gull eggs 

did not differ from colonies outside this northeastern Bering Sea embayment. 

1 
Various geologic and environmental matrices have been characterized to inventory the isotope 

signatures of different types of source materials, and document the ranges in Hg isotope ratios 

observed in these materials around the globe (Yin et al., 2010). Isotope ratios are reported using 

delta (δ) notation, which references all measured isotope ratios to a universally used delta 

standard, and provides a relative measure of the degree of Hg mass-dependent fractionation 

(MDF) (Blum and Bergquist, 2007). Variation in isotope ratios that is unrelated to isotope 

mass is termed mass-independent fractionation (MIF), reported using capital delta (Δ). Host 

rocks, Hg-bearing minerals, hydrothermal fields, and sediments and soils generally exhibit 

negative to slightly positive MDF and little to no MIF (Yin et al., 2010), with the exception of 

some soils and peat that were reported to have slightly negative or slightly positive MIF (Feng 

et al., 2010; WenFang et al., 2011). Coal also exhibits negative MDF, and negative to slightly 

positive MIF (Biswas et al., 2008). In contrast to terrestrial systems, measurements of aquatic 

biota display distinctly positive MIF, and MDF that ranges from negative to positive in 

freshwater systems (Bergquist and Blum, 2007; Gantner et al., 2009; Laffont et al., 2009; 

Perrot et al., 2010; Senn et al., 2010) and have tendencies toward more consistently positive 

values in marine systems (Point et al., 2011; Senn et al., 2010). 

Several studies have successfully used isotope signatures to trace Hg sources and fates in the 

environment (Estrade et al., 2011; Feng et al., 2010; Foucher et al., 2009; Gehrke et al., 2011; 

Liu et al., 2011). These studies have typically focused on soils and sediments at scales of tens 

of kilometers in order to assess localized environmental impacts or study fluvial Hg transport. 

But applying a similar approach on larger scales to help inform regional and global assessments 

is challenging. In part, this is because Hg undergoes many different biotic and abiotic reactions 

that can further fractionate and alter isotope source signatures after Hg enters the environment, 

thereby complicating the use of Hg isotope systems for source tracking. Isotope fractionation 

has been observed in numerous physical, chemical, and biological transformations of Hg, 

including redox reactions (photolysis, microbial, or chemical pathways), 

evaporation/condensation, volatilization, methlyation, and absorption (Yin et al., 2010). 

Photoreduction of Hg species is considered to be the most important mechanism responsible for 

the large MIF that is observed in aquatic systems (Bergquist and Blum, 2007). Although 

dynamic processes of fractionation are a complicating factor for source apportionment, they 

provide a valuable opportunity to use fractionation patterns to trace specific transformations 

and reactions in the environment and estimate their rates (Sonke, 2011). More controlled 

experimental studies are needed to better characterize the reactions that fractionate Hg so these 

processes can be unraveled from native isotope source signatures. 

The objective of the current work was to collect and refine information on the overall 

distribution of Hg and POPs in murre and gull eggs in the Norton Sound – Bering Strait region, 

and determine if Hg levels were correlated with estuarine wetlands, river outflows, and 

historical gold mining activities. 

The first part of the objective was met by collecting 261 clutches of murre and gull eggs from 

13 nesting colonies in the study area and 6 locations outside of it in 2008-2009, and analyzing 

subsets of them for Hg, PCBs, chlorinated pesticides, and BFRs (PBDEs; see Appendix 2). 

2 
The second part of the objective was met by conducting Hg isotope analyses and determining if 

Hg fractionation patterns differed among the Norton Sound colonies and other nesting 

locations. 

Methods 

Study Area and Sampling Sites 

During 2008-2009, 144 murre eggs, 111 clutches of glaucous gull eggs (one is believed to be 

from a common eider), and 6 clutches of glaucous-winged gull (L. glaucescens) eggs were 

collected from 19 nesting colonies in the Chukchi and Bering seas and Gulf of Alaska (Table 

1). Rural residents working under the direction of Kawerak Inc. in Nome obtained 87 of the 

murre eggs and 95 of the gull clutches from 13 sites in the Norton Sound – Bering Strait study 

area (Table 1 and Figs. 2 and 3), and AMNWR biologists and the St. George Traditional and 

Native Village of Point Hope councils collected the remaining eggs from 6 more distant nesting 

locations (Table 1 and Fig. 1; Cape Lisburne, the Kukpuk River delta, and St. Paul, St. George, 

Aiktak, and St. Lazaria islands). Eggs were not obtained in 2007, but in 2006, 134 common 

murre eggs, 44 thick-billed murre eggs, 127 clutches of glaucous-winged gull eggs, and 34 

clutches of glaucous gull eggs were collected at 18 Alaskan sites and 1 in Washington State 

(Table 2). Sampling at Middleton Island was designed to test how laying order in gull eggs and 

embryo development in murre eggs might affect contaminant levels. However, the 2006 

samples have not been analyzed yet, and only data from a subset of the 2008-2009 eggs are 

summarized in this report. 

3 
Figure 1. The 2006-2009 Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring Project (STAMP) seabird 

egg collecting sites. 

4 
 

Table 1. The 2008-2009 Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring Project (STAMP) seabird egg 

collecting sites (also see Figs. 1-3). 

Colony Species (eggs, clutches) 

Inside the Norton Sound – Bering Strait Area 

Shishmaref Inlet Glaucous Gull (27 eggs, 12 clutches) 

Little Diomede Island Thick-billed Murre (15 eggs, 15 clutches) 

Brevig Mission Glaucous Gull (16 eggs, 11 clutches) 

Sinuk River delta Glaucous Gull (15 eggs, 13 clutches) 

Sledge Island Common Murre (15 eggs, 15 clutches) 

Safety Sound Glaucous Gull (17 eggs, 12 clutches) 

*One believed to be from Common Eider! 

Bluff Common Murre (15 eggs, 15 clutches) 

Bluff Glaucous Gull (4 eggs, 4 clutches) 

Carolyn Island (Golovin Bay) Glaucous Gull (12 eggs, 12 clutches) 

Cape Darby Glaucous Gull (15 eggs,12 clutches) 

Cape Denbigh Common Murre (12 eggs, 12 clutches) 

Shaktoolik Glaucous Gull (16 eggs, 12 clutches) 

Stuart Island Glaucous Gull (10 eggs, 7 clutches) 

St. Lawrence Island Common Murre (15 eggs,15 clutches) 

St. Lawrence Island Thick-billed Murre (15 eggs,15 clutches) 

Total Sampling Sites: 13 Total Species Sampled: 3 

Total Murre Eggs: 87 

Total Gull Clutches: 95 

Outside the Norton Sound – Bering Strait Study Area 

Cape Lisburne 

Kukpuk River delta 

St. Paul Island 

St. George Island 

St. George Island 

Aiktak Island 

St. Lazaria Island 

St. Lazaria Island 

Unidentified Murre (7 eggs, 7 clutches) 

Glaucous Gull (16 eggs, 16 clutches) 

Thick-billed Murre (8 eggs, 8 clutches) 

Common Murre (12 eggs, 12 clutches) 

Thick-billed Murre (15 eggs, 15 clutches) 

Glaucous-winged Gull (8 eggs, 6 clutches) 

Common Murre (10 eggs, 10 clutches) 

Thick-billed Murre (5 eggs, 5 clutches) 

Total Sampling Sites: 6 Total Species Sampled: 4 

Total Murre Eggs: 57 

Total Gull Clutches: 22 

5 
 

 

Table 2. Clutches of seabird eggs banked by the Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring 

Project (STAMP) in the Marine Environmental Specimen Bank in Charleston, SC organized in 

a general southeast to northward pattern. Highlighted cells show the number of clutches that 

have been analyzed for contaminants. 

Colony 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total Water Body 

Tatoosh I., WA - COMU 14 14 Pacific Ocean 

Tatoosh I., WA - GWGU 11 11 25 

Viesokoi Rock (Sitka) - GWGU 15 3 of 8 13 36 

St. Lazaria I. - COMU 10 10 10 8 7 11 5 of 10 66 

St. Lazaria I. - TBMU 10 6 of 8 5 6 11 5 of 5 45 

St. Lazaria I. - GWGU 6 8 12 26 

Middleton I. - BLKI 11 12 12 12 47 

Middleton I. - COMU 10 of 15 8 of 11 16 16 58 

Middleton I. - GWGU 3 3 of 7 32 42 

Shoup Bay - BLKI 9 12 21 

Tatitlek - GWGU 12 12 

Gull I. - COMU 8 of 15 10 15 40 

Gull I. - GWGU 17 11 12 40 

Duck I. - COMU 4 15 6 25 

East Amatuli I. - COMU 11 7 10 of 15 33 Gulf of Alaska 

Chiniak Bay (Kodiak) - BLKI 8 12 20 511 

Buldir I. - BLKI 5 5 

Buldir I. - TBMU 1 11 12 14 38 

Aiktak I. - GWGU 5 of 6 6 

Bogoslof I. -COMU 9 10 5 of 11 30 

Bogoslof I. -TBMU 10 7 11 28 

St. George I. - BLKI 12 12 24 

St. George I. - COMU 11 1 15 14 5 of 12 53 

St. George I. - TBMU 7 12 7 of 10 9 4 5 of 15 57 

St. Paul I. - TBMU 5 of 8 8 

Kikertalik Lake (Bristol Bay) - GWGU 12 12 24 

Ualik Lake (Bristol Bay) - GWGU 3 of 8 12 20 

Shaiak I. - GWGU 13 3 of 36 11 60 

Cape Pierce - COMU 5 of 14 14 

Triangle I. (Nunivak) - GLGU 17 17 

Hooper Bay - GLGU 3 of 19 12 31 

St. Lawrence I. - COMU 3 15 5 of 15 33 

St. Lawrence I. - TBMU 6 of 8 14 15 5 of 15 52 

Stuart I. - GLGU 5 of 7 7 

Shaktoolik - GLGU 4 of 4 5 of 7 11 

Cape Denbigh - COMU 15 5 of 15 15 5 of 12 57 

Cape Darby - GLGU 5 of 11 11 

Carolyn I. - GLGU 5 of 11 11 

Bluff - GLGU 4 of 8 8 

Bluff - BLKI 6 6 

Bluff -COMU 11 12 5of 14 15 5 of 15 67 

Safety Sound - GLGU 12 11 10 *5 of 10 43 

Sledge I. - COMU 5 of 14 13 5 of 14 41 

Sinuk River delta - GLGU 3 of 6 12 5 of 10 28 

Brevig Mission - GLGU 5 of 11 11 

King I. - TBMU 15 15 

Little Diomede - TBMU 5 of 15 15 Bering Sea 

Little Diomede - UNMU 9 9 840 

Shismaref - Tin Creek - GLGU 5 5 

Shismaref -Arctic Lagoon - GLGU 3 3 

Shismaref -Egg I. - GLGU 2 2 

Shismaref - Kividlow - GLGU 2 2 

Cape Deciet (Deering) - COMU 12 12 

Noatak River delta - GLGU 3 of 11 11 

Cape Thompson - UNMU 8 12 20 

Kukpuk River delta - GLGU 5 of 15 15 

Cape Lisburne - TBMU 6 of 9 9 Chukchi Sea 

Cape Lisburne - UNMU 24 5 of 7 31 110 

Total 41 26 44 339 0 1486 

Black-legged Kittiwakes 123 

Common Murre 543 * One of these eggs is believed to be a Common Eider 

Glaucous Gull 216 

Glaucous-winged Gull 277 

Murre Spp. 60 

70 

5 of 

111 120 232 318 185 

6 
 

 

Bering Sea 

Chukchi Sea 

Gulf of Alaska 

ALASKA 

SIBERIA 

Beaufort Sea 

CANADA 

Figure 2. General location of the Norton Sound – Bering Strait study area (yellow oval). 

7 
 

 

Sledge I. 

Shishmaref Inlet 

Little Diomede I. 

St. Lawrence I. 

Brevig Mission 

Sinuk R. delta 

Bluff 

Carolyn I. 

Cape Darby 

Cape Denbigh 

Shaktoolik 

Stuart I. 

Thick-billed Murre Eggs Glaucous Gull Eggs 

Common Murre Eggs 

Norton Sound 

Bering Sea 

Chukchi Sea 

Kotzebue Sound 

Seward Peninsula Bering Strait 

Yukon River 

Delta 

Safety

Sound 

Nome 

Kotzebue 

ALASKA 

SIBERIA

 Figure 3. The 13 nesting locations in the Norton Sound – Bering Strait study area 

 where murre and gull eggs were collected in 2008-2009. 

8 
 

Sample Collecting, Processing, and Banking 

All of the murre and gull eggs that we analyzed for the study were collected, processed, and 

banked using established STAMP protocols (Rust et al. 2010). Kawerak Inc. in Nome 

organized and coordinated the Norton Sound – Bering Strait collections. Egg collecting kits 

consisting of 50-quart coolers containing foam rubber layers to protect the samples, collecting 

supplies, shipping labels, and federal and state scientific collecting permits were mailed to 

participating residents in the study area (Appendix 1). Additional kits were sent to the colonies 

outside of the Norton Sound – Bering Strait study area. 

Collectors returned the coolers containing the eggs to the AMNWR laboratory in Homer, 

Alaska, where the samples were refrigerated until they could be processed. Processing included 

cleaning the eggs with Type 1 distilled water, measuring them (length, width, whole egg mass), 

breaking/cutting them in half and pouring the contents into chemically cleaned glass measuring 

cups under a positive pressure laminar flow hood, weighing the cups containing the contents on 

a digital scale, covering the cups with clean UHV foil (All Foils, Cleveland OH, USA) and 

homogenizing the contents using a high-speed blender (VirTis, Warminster PA, USA) pipetting 

the contents into a series of labeled temperature resistant 15 mL Teflon jars and polypropylene 

cryovials (Nalgene. Rochester NY, USA), and freezing the samples until they could be shipped 

to the Marine ESB in Charleston, South Carolina, for long-term (decadal) storage at -150 °C in 

stainless steel liquid nitrogen (LN2) vapor freezers. Murre eggs were processed individually 

and gull eggs from the same clutches were pooled before they were homogenized. 

Processed samples were sent to the Marine ESB in LN2 dry shippers. After they were formally 

entered into the specimen bank’s long-term storage system, subsamples were released to NIST 

chemists for Hg and POP analyses. Subsamples were also sent to the Stable Isotope Hydrology 

and Ecology Research Laboratory (SIHERL) in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, for 13C and 15N 

stable isotope analyses. Egg shells were rinsed with Type 1 water, dried, placed in labeled 

plastic bags, and mailed to the University of Alaska Museum of the North (UAMN) in 

Fairbanks, Alaska, for long-term storage. 

Mercury (Hg) and Hg, Carbon (C) and Nitrogen (N) Isotopes 

Total Hg Levels 

We employed isotope dilution cold vapor inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (IDCV-ICPMS) to determine total mercury (THg) levels in the egg samples. This technique has 

been described elsewhere (Christopher et al. 2001) and is only summarized here. Isotopically 

enriched 201Hg spike solution (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA) was prepared and 

calibrated using NIST SRM 1641d Mercury in Water standard solution. The spike was added 

quantitatively to the sample masses to yield an isotopic ratio (201Hg/202Hg) that minimized 

random error propagation. The specific sequences and methods for digestion and addition of 

the 201Hg spike solution to the 2008 and 2009 batches are described below. The resulting 

digestant was mixed with a SnCl2 and HCl reductant solution in a gas-liquid separator that 

allowed cold vapor transfer of the resulting Hg0

 in a stream of argon gas to the inductively 

9 
coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICPMS) injector. We used a VG Elemental Plasma Quad 3 

ICPMS (Windsford, Cheshire, United Kingdom) set at normal power and gas flow rates in its 

time resolved analysis mode to measure the isotope ratios. 

2008 Collections, Batches 1-8: The aliquots that we digested for THg weighed about 0.5 g each 

and we weighed them directly into quartz microwave vessels using a three-place analytical 

balance (Mettler, Toledo OH, USA, Model PG603-S). The vessels contained 1.0 mL nitric acid 

(Optima, Fisher Scientific, Suwanee GA, USA), 0.5 mL hydrogen peroxide (Trace Select, 

Fluka, Germany), and 0.5 mL of high purity water. We digested the samples in a Perkin-Elmer 

(Shelton CT, USA) Multiwave microwave oven at the highest possible temperatures (up to 300 

oC) and pressures (up to 8 MPa) that was programmed as follows: (1) 100W to 600 W ramp up 

over 5 min, (2) 5 min hold at 600 W, and (3) 20 min hold at 1000 W. After digestion, we 

transferred the samples to clean containers, diluted them to 10.0 mL with high purity water, and 

blended them with aliquots of isotopically enriched mercury (201Hg enriched isotopic spike, 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA) that had been calibrated against NIST SRM 1641d 

Mercury in Water standard solution. As a final step before running the samples, we diluted 

them to about 0.5 ng/g each with high purity water and 2 % mass fraction HNO3 and 2 % mass 

fraction HCl. 

We ran batches 1-8 during 24 February 2010 – 5 March 2010. Each batch consisted of two 

rotors with a total of twelve vessels containing 10 unknown egg samples, one digest of QC04­

ERM1 Egg Reference Material 1, and one method blank. QC04-ERM1 is an in-house control 

material that was made from pooled murre eggs (Vander Pol et al. 2007). It has been analyzed 

repeatedly for Hg and has been assigned a reference value. We ran the QC04-ERM1 digest at 

the beginning and end of each batch for method validation (means are reported). We also ran a 

mass bias correction sample at the beginning and end of each batch to capture instrumental drift 

in mass bias and correct the measured Hg isotopic ratios, as appropriate. Each experiment 

consisted of two batches run consecutively on the ICPMS. 

2009 Collections, Batches 9-10: The aliquots that we digested for THg weighed between about 

0.15 g and 0.3 g each. We weighed them directly into 35 mL glass microwave vessels using a 

five-place analytical balance (Sartorius, Model MC210S), and then spiked them with known 

quantities of isotopically enriched Hg (201Hg enriched isotopic spike, Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory, USA) that had been calibrated against NIST SRM 1641d Mercury in Water 

standard solution. We digested the samples with 1.2 mL nitric acid (Optima, Fisher Scientific, 

Suwanee GA USA) and 0.3 mL hydrogen peroxide (Trace Select, Fluka, Germany) in a CEM 

(Matthews NC, USA) Discover open-focus microwave oven programmed at 50 W for 2 min, 

followed by a 50 W ramp up for 2 min, followed by a 225 W hold for 6 min (“Dolphin skin 35” 

method on the microwave laptop). Maximum temperatures and pressures were 250 oC and 275 

psi, respectively, with typical maximum digestion conditions of 200 oC and 200 psi. After 

digestion, we transferred the samples to clean containers and diluted them to about 0.5 ng/g 

each with high purity water and 2 % mass fraction HNO3 and 2 % mass fraction HCl in 

preparation for running them. 

We ran batches 9 to 10 during 16-22 September 2010. Each batch consisted of 20 unknown egg 

samples, 3 digests of QC04-ERM1 Egg Reference Material 1, and two method blanks. We ran 

10 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 digests of QC04-ERM1 and 3 mass bias correction samples at the beginning, middle, and end 

of each batch in order to validate the method and capture instrumental drift in mass bias and 

correct the measured isotopic ratios, as appropriate. The repeated QC04-ERM1 measurements 

and triplicate analyses of unknown seabird eggs are listed in Table 3. 

Table 3. Hg measurements of QC04-ERM1 Egg Reference Material 1 and blanks (the reference 

value for QC04-ERM1 is 101 ng/g ± 3 ng/g wet mass). 

Batch # Sample Measured Hg Value ± 

Expanded Uncertainty (ng/g) DF Coverage Factor Blank (ng) 

1 QC04-ERM1 100 ± 2.1 51 2.0 0.110 

2 QC04-ERM1 100 ± 2.1 51 2.0 0.113 

3 QC04-ERM1 95 ± 2.0 51 2.0 0.118 

4 QC04-ERM1 96 ± 2.0 51 2.0 0.107 

5 QC04-ERM1 101 ± 2.1 51 2.0 0.084 

6 QC04-ERM1 106 ± 2.2 51 2.0 0.081 

7 QC04-ERM1 97 ± 2.1 51 2.0 0.085 

8 QC04-ERM1 99 ± 2.1 51 2.0 0.110 

9 

QC04-ERM1 95 ± 2.2 35 2.0 4.03 

QC04-ERM1 97 ± 2.2 38 2.0 

QC04-ERM1 97 ± 2.2 37 2.0 3.93 

10 

QC04-ERM1 97 ± 2.1 52 2.0 0.210 

QC04-ERM1 99 ± 2.1 52 2.0 

QC04-ERM1 97 ± 2.0 52 2.0 0.220 

Seabird 

Egg 

Triplicate 

ST09E1398C-1 83 ± 1.3 61 2.0 0.085 

ST09E1398C-2 84 ± 1.4 61 2.0 0.085 

ST09E1398C-3 83 ± 1.4 61 2.0 0.110 

Mean St Dev % RSD 

QC04-ERM1 98 2.7 2.8

 ST09E1398C 83 ± 1.4 0.50 0.60 

11 
Hg Isotopes 

We selected 20 thick-billed murre eggs and 25 common murre eggs from 7 representative 

colonies and analyzed them for Hg isotopes (Table 4). We digested 0.6 - 1.0 g aliquots of the egg 

samples in glass vessels using microwave assisted acid digestion (CEM Discover, Matthews NC, 

USA). Microwave digestion consisted of a multi-stage profile of 50 W for 2 min, 125 W for 2 

min, 200 W for 2 min, and 250 W for 8 min. Maximum digestion conditions were 275 psi and 

230 °C, and typical conditions were 275 psi and 175 °C. Hg stable isotopes were measured using 

a Nu Plasma multi-collector ICP-MS (Nu Instruments, Wrexham, United Kingdom) at the 

Institut Pluridisciplinaire de Recherche sur l’Environnement et les Materiaux (IPREM) facility in 

Pau, France. The isotopes were 198Hg, 199Hg, 200Hg, 201Hg, 202Hg, and 204Hg. The lightest isotope 

(

198Hg) was used as a reference for ratioing all of the other isotopes. Hg samples were introduced 

to the ICP as a cold vapor by mixing them with 3% SnCl2/10% HCl and then letting them react 

in a custom quartz gas liquid separator using an argon gas flow rate of 40 mL/minute. Blank 

subtractions were performed using the “On Peak Zero” method for each mass. Mass bias was 

corrected using the 205Tl/203Tl ratio and the exponential mass fractionation law by simultaneously 

introducing Tl (NIST 997 Thallium Isotopic solution) in a dry aerosol form using a desolvating 

nebulizer (DSN100, Nu Instruments). We used a standard sample-bracketing system to calculate 

δ values (mass dependent fractionation, MDF) relative to the reference standard NIST SRM 

3133 Mercury Spectrometric Solution using the following equation: 

Equation 1: δxxxHg(‰) = [((xxxHg/198Hg)Sample/(xxxHg/198Hg)SRM3133) – 1] * 1000 

The mass (xxx) of each isotope ratioed to (198Hg, and xxxHg/198Hg)SRM3133 represented the 

average ratio of the two NIST SRM 3133 standards bracketing the samples. NIST SRM 3133 is 

the universally accepted reference standard currently being used in Hg isotopic research. As a 

convention (Blum and Bergquist 2007), we used δ202Hg to report MDF. We reported mass 

independent fractionation (MIF) using the capital delta notation (Δ) and calculated it using the 

Biswas et al. (2008) formulas listed below for ranges below 10‰: 

Formula 1: Δ199Hg(‰) = δ199Hg – (δ202Hg * 0.2520) 

Formula 2: Δ200Hg(‰) = δ200Hg – (δ202Hg * 0.5024) 

Formula 3: Δ201Hg(‰) = δ201Hg – (δ202Hg * 0.7520) 

The ΔxxxHg notation describes the differences between measured δxxxHg and theoretically 

predicted δxxxHg using MDF laws. As a convention, we used the most abundant odd isotope 

(Δ199Hg) to discuss MIF. Standard-sample bracketing was used and samples were run between 

0.25 ng g

-1 and 1.5 ng g-1 (0.25 V to 2.0 V for 202Hg). 

Analytical batches of murre eggs consisted of 5 eggs followed by 1 sample of UM-Almaden 

intercomparison Hg Standard and either QC-04ERM01 or SRM 1947. UM-Almaden is the most 

widely reported secondary standard used to assess inter-laboratory results for Hg isotope 

measurements, and measured results agreed well with previously published values (Table 5). 

There are currently no biological reference materials available that are certified for Hg isotopes 

that can be used for matrix-matched inter-laboratory comparison and method validation. As a 

result, the absolute accuracy of these types of measurements in a given matrix is currently 

12 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

difficult to definitively confirm, and therefore data are most suitable for investigating relative 

trends to investigate environmental processes. To begin to address this deficiency, we measured 

QC-04ERM01 and SRM 1947 and compared these results to previous measurements made on 

these materials by other laboratories. Measured 2SD values of QC-04ERM01 and SRM 1947 

overlapped with previously reported values (Table 5), supporting the validity of the analytical 

methodology. Measurement repeatability across batches was similar for UM-Almaden and the 

two biological reference materials. Complex biological matrices may induce fractionation when 

the matrix is concentrated enough to impair the efficiency of cold vapor generation (personal 

observation). To confirm that matrix-induced fractionation bias was not present in our egg 

samples, QC-04ERM01 was run repeatedly across a range of dilutions equal to the dilutions used 

for murre egg samples (70 x to 400 x; [Hg] from 0.25 ng g-1 to 1.5 ng g-1). No systematic bias 

was observed in MDF or MIF, confirming that matrix-induced fractionation differences between 

samples did not affect trends (Table 5). There was also no systematic bias observed for SRM 

1947 across the range of dilutions used for this material (250 x to 1000 x; [Hg] from 0.25 ng g-1 

to 1.0 ng g-1). 

 Table 4. Murre eggs from representative colonies that were analyzed for Hg 

isotopes. 

Colony Species (eggs) 

Little Diomede Island Thick-billed Murre (5 eggs) 

Sledge Island Common Murre (5 eggs) 

Bluff Common Murre (5 eggs) 

Cape Denbigh Common Murre (5 eggs) 

St. Lawrence Island Common Murre (5 eggs) 

St. Lawrence Island Thick-billed Murre (5 eggs) 

St. George Island Thick-billed Murre (5 eggs) 

St. Lazaria Island Common Murre (5 eggs) 

St. Lazaria Island Thick-billed Murre (5 eggs) 

Total Sampling Sites: 7 Total Common Murre Eggs: 25 

 Total Thick-billed Murre Eggs: 20 

13 
Table 5. Quality control sample mercury isotope values compared to previously reported measurements (a

relative to NIST SRM 3133 Mercury Standard Solution). Data were obtained by running the samples concurand reference materials and reported as mean ± 2 SD. Four digests of in-house QC-04ERM01 Murre Egg Cdigests of NIST SRM 1947 Lake Michigan Fish Tissue were prepared. Samples sizes reflect analytical rdigests and stock solutions. Additional quality control samples were run both before and after the batches cont

were run to validate the methods (7 aliquots of QC-04ERM01, 5 aliquots of SRM 1947, and 15 aliquots of UM

Reference 

Material 

Hg 

(ng/g) N δ199Hg (‰) δ200Hg (‰) δ201Hg (‰) δ202H g (‰) δ20

(‰

Intercomparison Hg Standard 

(UM-Almaden) 

Blum and 

Bergquist, 2007 22-25 -0.14 ±0.06 -0.27 ±0.04 -0.44 ±0.07 -0.54 ±0.08 -0

±0

Measured 28 -0.13 ±0.13 -0.26 ±0.15 -0.42 ±0.17 -0.52 ±0.20 -0

±0

SRM 1947 Lake 

Michigan Fish 

Tissue 

254 ± 5 

Point et al. 2011 9 5.23 ±0.29 0.60 ±0.19 4.65 ±0.44 0.99 ±0.28 N

Measured 11 5.61 ±0.15 0.73 ±0.13 5.05 ±0.19 1.22 ±0.21 1

±0

QC-04ERM01Murre 

Egg Control 

Material 

101 ± 3 

Point et al. 2011 7 1.50 ±0.17 0.55 ±0.24 1.78 ±0.18 0.97 ±0.26 N

Measured 13 1.59 ±0.12 0.60 ±0.14 1.92 ±0.16 1.09 ±0.24 1

±0

ng/g each 

analytical 

batch was run 

0.25 2 1.57 ±0.03 0.63 ±0.07 1.94 ±0.20 1.25 ±0.15 1

±0

0.5 1 1.54 0.60 2.01 1.17 11.0 6 1.57 ±0.13 0.55 ±0.13 1.86 ±0.12 .99 ±0.15 1

±0

1.25 2 1.64 ±0.01 0.69 ±0.01 2.03 ±0.02 1.20 ±0.01 1

±0

1.5 2 1.64 ±0.10 0.62 ±0.04 1.95 ±0.03 1.09 ±0.02 1

±0

14 
 

 

Carbon and Nitrogen Stable Isotopes 

Aliquots of the samples (Appendix 2) were sent to the SIHERL facility in LN2 dry shippers for 

stable carbon and nitrogen isotope analyses using methods previously described by Hobson et al. 

(2002). After the samples were freeze-dried, lipids were extracted using a 2:1 

chlorofom:methanol soak and rinse. Resulting filtrates were dried under a fume hood for 24 h 

before powdering and subsampling them for analysis. Carbon and nitrogen stable isotope ratios 

were obtained by loading about 1 mg portions of the powdered samples into tin cups and 

combusting them at 1200 °C using continuous-flow isotope ratio mass spectrometry (CFIRMS) on a 

Europa 20:20 IRMS interfaced with a Robo Prep combustion system. The ratios were expressed in 

delta () notation relative to the Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite (VPDB) or AIR standards for carbon 

and nitrogen, respectively (Hobson et al. 1994). Analytical uncertainties were estimated at ± 0.3‰ 

for δ

15N and ± 0.1‰ for δ13C using within-run replicate measurements on albumen standards. The 

albumen standard, manufactured in-house at the SIHERL facility, has been calibrated to 

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Vienna PDB and Atmospheric Air standards for δ13C 

for δ

15N, respectively. 

Statistics 

We used commercially available software to run statistical tests (SAS, JMP 9, Cary, NC, USA). 

One-way ANOVAs were used to identify differences among Hg levels and δ (MDF), Δ (MIF), 

δ15N, and δ13C values, and pair-wise comparisons were made using Tukey-Kramer tests at the P 

< 0.05 significance level. 

Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) 

Sample Preparation 

We selected 60 murre eggs and 58 clutches of gull eggs from the 19 sampling locations (Fig. 1 

and Appendix 2) and analyzed them for chlorinated pesticides, PCBs, and BFRs (PBDEs). In 

each case, we weighed 3.0 g aliquots of the homogenized egg samples on a three-place analytical 

balance (Mettler XP1203S, Toledo OH, USA) and mixed them with about 8 g of diatomaceous 

earth that had been heated to 650 oC for 12 hours and cooled in a desiccator. The mixtures were 

transferred to 33 mL pressurized fluid extraction cells (PFE; ASE Dionex, Salt Lake City UT, 

USA) and 0.5 mL of mixed internal standard solution was added to them using gas-tight syringes 

weighed to five places on an analytical balance (Sartorius MC210S, Elk Grove IL, USA) before 

and after the liquids was injected into the cells. The internal standard solution contained 13C 

labeled PCB congeners 28, 52, 118, 153, 180, 194, and 206; 13C labeled 4,4-DDE, 4,4’-DDD, 

4,4’-DDT, HCB, oxychlordane, trans-chlordane, trans-nonachlor; F labeled BDE congeners 47 

and 160; and BDE 104. Between 20 and 89 ng of the internal standard compounds were added to 

the samples, as appropriate. We prepared blanks and murre egg homogenates for quality 

assurance using the same techniques (Vander Pol et al. 2007), and we also analyzed two gull 

eggs twice to help verify analytical methods (Numbers 1340 and 1403; see Appendix 2). 

15 
 

Next, we weighed 1.0 mL aliquots of six calibration solutions (A-F) in gas-tight syringes and 

added them to 11.0 mL PFE cells packed with clean heat-treated diatomaceous earth. The 

calibration solutions were covered by small amounts of diatomaceous earth before 0.25 mL 

aliquots of 24 toxaphene congener calibration solutions (A-F) were added to the cells (see above 

and Vander Pol 2005). Small quantities of diatomaceous earth were also used to cover the 

solutions before the internal standards were added to the cells, and then they were filled with 

more diatomaceous earth. The calibration solutions contained SRMs 2257 (Brominated Diphenyl 

Ethers in Isooctane), 2259 (Chlorinated Biphenyl Congeners in Isooctane), 2261 (Chlorinated 

Pesticides in Hexane), and 2275 (Chlorinated Pesticide Solution-II in Isooctane), and solutions of 

HBCDs, octachlorostyrene, and pentachlorobenzene. 

Because the new SRMs 2257 and 2259 contained varying levels of congeners that were typically 

larger than the amounts found in previously used SRMs, we created three stock solutions for (1) 

pentachlorobenzene, (2) SRM 2259, and (3) SRMs 2261, 2275, 2257, HBCD, and 

octachlorostyrene to bracket the sample levels. The highest levels of these stocks (labeled 1) 

were gravimetrically combined to create Cal A. Middle level stocks (labeled 2) were combined 

for Cal B, and the lowest level stocks (labeled 3) were combined for Cal C. A small amount of 

Cal A was diluted to make Cal D. Cal B was diluted to make Cal E, and Cal C was diluted to 

make Cal F. The masses of the compounds in the calibration curves ranged from 0.002 ng g-1 to 

555 ng g-1. 

The samples, calibration solutions, and control materials were extracted with CH2Cl2 using the 

PFE. Conditions were as follows: cell temperatures 100 °C, equilibration times 5 min, static 

times 5 min, and cell pressures 13.8 MPa. Three cycles were run using one-third of the solvent 

each time. The PFE tubing was rinsed with 8.0 mL of CH2Cl2 between every sample by selecting 

the “rinse” option and instructing the instrument to alternate between the solvent A and B 

channels (both vessels contained CH2Cl2). 

We reduced the sample extracts to about 10 mL using a Turbovap II (Zymark, Hopkinton, MA, 

USA) and evaporating them in a stream of purified N2. Then we ran nonvolatile solvent 

extractable material (“lipid”) analyses on the extracts and reference materials by gravimetrically 

weighing 2.0 mL portions of the extracts and putting them into preweighed aluminum dishes and 

allowing the solvents to evaporate before reweighing the dishes. After analyzing the sample 

extracts for lipids, we reduced them to 1.0 mL in the Turbovap. High molecular mass compounds 

were removed from the extracts using size exclusion chromatography (SEC; Accuprep, J2 

Scientific, Columbia, MO, USA) consisting of a PLGel 110 mm x 25 mm i.d; 10 μm particle size 

guard column (Polymer Labs, Amherst, MA, USA) coupled to a 600 mm x 25 mm (10 μm 

particle size with 100 Å diameter pores) PLGel column (Polymer Labs, Amherst, MA, USA). A 

CH2Cl2 solvent was delivered at 10.0 mL/min. Absorbance was monitored at 254 nm using the 

internal UV/VIS detector (Linear, model 200, San Jose, CA, USA). Samples were automatically 

injected and the first 180.1 mL of CH2Cl2 containing high molecular mass material was 

discarded. The next 73.4 mL, containing the analytes of interest, was collected and retained. 

After transferring the fractions to Turbovap tubes, we begin reducing their volume and changed 

the solvent to hexane, and then continued reducing them down to 0.5 mL before transferring 

them to amber GC autosampler vials. 

16 
We cleaned the sample extracts with an automated solid phase extraction (SPE) Rapid Trace 

(Caliper Technologies, Hopkinton, MA, USA) using 3.0 mL SPE cartridges. Alumina (50 μm to 

200 μm; Arcōs Organics, Trenton, NJ, USA) was activated by baking it at 650 °C overnight and 

allowing it to cool in a desiccator. The alumina was partially deactivated by adding 5% hexanerinsed, deionized water (mass fraction) to it. Resulting substrates were packed between two frits 

in a 3.0 mL Bond Elut reservoir (Varian, Palo Alto, CA, USA) to about 3.9 cm bed height. This 

gave us a mass of about 1.8 g alumina. Sample extracts were passed through the alumina 

columns and eluted with 9.0 mL of 35:65 CH2Cl2:hexane (volume fraction) at 1.0 mL/min. The 

columns were pre-eluted with 6.0 mL 50:50 CH2Cl2:hexane and 8.0 mL of hexane at 1.2 mL/min 

before adding the samples. The Rapid Trace performed clean up steps using CH2Cl2 and hexane 

between each sample run. After transferring the fractions to Turbovap tubes, we began reducing 

their volume and changed the solvent to hexane, and then continued reducing them down to 0.5 

mL before transferring them to amber GC autosampler vials. 

GC/MS Analyses 

We analyzed the samples with an electron impact (EI) GC/MS (Agilent, Palo Alto, CA, USA) 

operating in the selected ion monitoring mode (SIM) for selected chlorinated pesticides and all of 

the PCB and PBDE congeners. The instrument was equipped with a 30.0 m x 0.18 mm x 0.18 

m i.d. DB-5MS column (J&W Scientific, Folsom, CA, USA) with a 5.0 m x 0.25 mm retention 

gap added to the beginning of the column. A PTV injector (Agilent 6850) injected the samples in 

20.0 μL (4 x 5 μL) amounts after the solvent vent flow rate set at 65.0 mL/min of nitrogen and 

the unit’s inlet was cooled to 10 °C for 1.5 min with liquid nitrogen. After injection, the inlet was 

heated to a final transfer temperature of 250 °C at a rate of 720 °C/min with no hold time, and 

then the temperature was ramped up to 280 °C at a rate of 20 °C/min and held for 10 min to bake 

off any remaining compounds from the liner. 

The GC oven was held at 80 °C for 1.5 min and then the temperature was ramped up to 170 °C at 

a rate of 25 °C/min, then ramped up to 270 °C at a rate of 2 °C/min, and then ramped up one 

more time to 325 °C at a rate of 25 °C/min before it was held isothermally for 10 min (total run 

time 67.3 min). We used helium as the carrier gas set at a constant flow rate at 0.7 mL/min, and 

maintained the quadrupole, source, and transfer line at 150 °C, 250 °C, and 300 °C, respectively. 

We set the GC/MS in the negative chemical ionization (NCI) mode using SIM equipped with a 

30.0 m x 0.18 mm x 0.18 m i.d. DB-XLB column (J&W Scientific, Folsom, CA, USA) that had 

a 5.0 m x 0.25 mm retention gap fitted to one end. Methane was used as the reaction gas and 

samples were injected using a PTV, as described above. The GC oven was held at 120 °C for 1 

min, then ramped up to 230 °C at a rate of 30 °C/min, then ramped up to 260 °C at a rate of 10 

°C/min, then ramped to 284 °C at a rate of 4.8 °C/min, and then ramped up one more time to 300 

°C at a rate of 9.6 °C/min before it was held isothermally for 1.67 min (total run time 16.0 min). 

The carrier gas was helium set at a flow rate of 1.5 mL/min for 4.5 min. Gas flow was then 

ramped up to 0.7 mL/min at a rate of 50.0 mL/min for 8.5 min, and then ramped up to 1.4 

mL/min at a rate of 50.0 mL/min for 3.0 min. All other conditions were the same as the EI run. 

The 2008 and 2009 samples were analyzed separately in four batches. Glaucous gull samples 

were analyzed alone, and the murres and glaucous-winged gull eggs were analyzed together. 

17 
Statistics 

We quantified the data using at least 3 calibration points that bracketed the samples and allowed 

the intercept to float. Limits of detection (LODs) were calculated as the lowest observable 

calibration solutions divided by the sample masses, and limits of quantitation (LOQs) were 

calculated as the average blank values plus 3 times the standard deviations and then divided by 

the sample masses. 

We ran a multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA) on a lipid-mass basis on the compounds 

that had all values above detection limits and the control materials fell within the reference range 

(4,4’-DDE, β-HCH, cis-nonachlor, HCB, pentachlorobenzene, heptachlor epoxide, mirex, 

octachlorostyrene, oxychlordane, and the sum of 16 PCB congeners because of limited degrees 

of freedom—28+31, 105, 118, 119, 128, 137, 138, 146, 149, 153+132, 156, 170, 177, 180+193, 

194, and 207) to compare the Norton Sound common murre and glaucous gull eggs with eggs 

from nesting locations outside of it. One exception was made; BDE 47 was included in the 

MANOVA even though one unidentified murre egg from Cape Lisburne I. was below the 

detection limit (Egg ID 1454 was 0.08732 ng g-1 vs its LOQ of 0.08734 ng g-1) We also ran 

MANOVAs on eggs from all of the colonies for further geographical comparisons, and on the St. 

Lawrence, St. George, and St. Lazaria island common and thick-billed murre samples to check 

for species differences. If MANOVAs differed statistically (P < 0.05), we used individual 

ANOVAs and Tukey-Kramer post-hoc tests to find out which colonies were different. We also 

conducted principal components analyses (PCAs) on total compound percentages to help 

visualize patterns, and ran regressions on the compounds shown in bold (see above) to check the 

multiyear St. George Island thick-billed murre and St. Lazaria Island common and thick-billed 

murre data sets for temporal changes. Correlations on a lipid-mass basis were conducted with the 

stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes. We used commercially available software to run all 

statistical tests (SAS, JMP 9, Cary, NC, USA). 

Results 

Mercury (Hg) and Hg, Carbon (C), and Nitrogen (N) Isotopes 

Because the Hg levels found in the murre and gull eggs were >84 % methylmercury (Davis et al. 

2004), only total Hg values are reported here. Hg levels and δ

15N and δ13C isotope values are 

listed in Appendix 3. 

Taxonomic Groupings 

This data set contained 30 common murre, 25 thick-billed murre, 5 unidentified murre, 53 

glaucous gull, and 5 glaucous-winged gull eggs. Glaucous and glaucous-winged gulls have 

similar foraging strategies and occupy similar ecological niches within their arctic (glaucous 

gulls) and subarctic-temperate ranges (glaucous-winged gulls; see Vander Pol et al. 2009). 

However, because these species do not nest together, we could not directly compare Hg levels in 

their eggs, and because glaucous-winged gull eggs were only obtained from a single colony 

18 
 

(Aiktak Island in the Aleutians), we elected to refer to these birds collectively as “gulls”. 

Common and thick-billed murres are also ecologically similar species, but they use different 

foraging strategies. Both species are deep-diving fish-eaters capable of exploiting marine 

environments up to 170 km from their colonies (Ainley et al. 2002). However, common murres 

tend to feed closer to shore and at shallower depths, compared to thick-billed murres, and thickbills typically take more benthic fish and invertebrates than commons (Swartz 1966, Springer et 

al. 1984, Springer et al. 1986, Springer et al. 1987, Dragoo 1991, Barrett et al. 1997, Gaston and 

Jones 1998, Roseneau et al. 2000, Vander Pol et al. 2004). These species typically nest close to 

one another at many Alaskan colonies, but almost all of the birds (~90%) occupying the three 

Norton Sound nesting locations targeted in this study (i.e., Sledge Island, Bluff, and Cape 

Denbigh) were common murres (e.g., see Sowls et al. 1978, Murphy et al. 1985). 

Given this information, we compared common and thick-billed eggs from two colonies where 

they nested together (St. Lawrence and St. Lazaria islands; see Fig. 1) to see how 

interchangeable these species might be as biointegrators of Hg in their local marine 

environments. Although total Hg levels did not differ significantly at St. Lazaria Island 

(ANOVA on log Hg), common murre values were higher than thick-billed murre levels at St. 

Lawrence Island (P = 0.05; see Fig. 4). However, isotope fractionation patterns for δ202Hg and 

Δ199Hg, and δ15N and δ13C values did not differ at either colony (P > 0.218; see Fig. 5). Although 

there was a significant difference in Hg levels between these species at St. Lawrence Island, the 

difference was small relative to the geographic trends seen across the study area (Figs. 4 and 6). 

This information indicated that either species could be used to represent regional Hg patterns. All 

of the Hg isotope and δ

15N and δ13C data were also similar between the species. Given this 

information, we elected to treat these birds as just “murres” at the colonies where they nested 

together. 

Taxonomic Comparisons of Hg Levels and δ15N and δ13C 

Hg levels ranged from 2 ng g-1 to 644 ng g-1, with a grand mean of 118 ng g-1 (n = 118) and an 

overall relative standard deviation (RSD) of 71 %. The average RSD among replicate eggs in 

each sampling event (n = 5) was 39 %. Murres eggs varied between 2 ng g-1 and 262 ng g-1, with 

a mean and standard error of 83 ng g-1 ± 9.8 ng g-1, and gull eggs ranged from 55 ng g-1 to 644 ng 

g

-1, with a mean and standard error of 154 ng g-1 ± 10.0 ng g-1. Overall, Hg levels were 

significantly higher in the gull eggs than they were in the murres eggs (ANOVA, P < 0.0001), 

and δ15N was also significantly higher (P = 0.008) in these samples (16.3 ‰ ± 0.28 ‰), 

compared to the murre eggs (15.2 ‰ ± 0.28 ‰). In contrast, δ13C was significantly lower (P = 

0.0003) in the gull eggs (-21.8 ‰ ± 0.23 ‰) than it was in the murre eggs (-20.6 ‰ ± 0.23 ‰). 

When we compared murre and gull eggs within regions, the results were the same as the overall 

comparisons (P < 0.05), with the following exceptions: in the northern Bering and Chukchi seas, 

there was no difference in δ15N values; in Norton Sound, the murres had higher δ15N levels than 

the gulls did (P = 0.002) and there was no difference in δ13C values; and in the southern Bering 

Sea, gull δ13C levels were higher than the murre values (P = 0.05). 

19 
       

15

Hg (ng/g)

250

COMU

200 TBMU

150

100

50 *

0

St. Lawrence Island St. Lazaria Island

‐20

‐15

‐10

‐5

0

5

10

δ202Hg Δ199Hg δ15N δ13C δ202Hg Δ199Hg δ15N δ13C 0/00

COMU TBMU

St. Lawrence Island St. Lazaria Island

Figure 4. Hg levels in common murre and thick-billed murre eggs from St. 

Lawrence (northern Bering Sea) and St. Lazaria (southern Gulf of Alaska) 

islands. Species differences were only present at St. Lawrence Island (P = 0.05). 

Bars = mean ± standard error. 

Figure 5. Hg isotope patterns in common murre and thick-billed murre eggs from St. 

Lawrence (northern Bering Sea) and St. Lazaria (southern Gulf of Alaska) islands. 

Species differences were not present at either colony. Bars = mean ± standard error. 

20 
200 SE Alaska

160

120

80

40

0
 

GULLS MURRES
 

Figure 6. Hg levels in murre and gull eggs among regions. Bars = mean ± standard 

error, and different letters indicate significant differences based on 1-way ANOVA and 

Tukey tests. SE Alaska = southeastern Alaska, SBS = southeastern Bering Sea, and 

NBS/Chukchi Sea = northern Bering and Chukchi seas. 

SBS

Norton Sound

NBS/Chukchi Sea

AAA A B A B

Hg (ng/g)

21 
Regional Comparisons of Hg Levels and δ15N and δ13C 

We initially checked the entire data set for geographic patterns in Hg levels to identify largescale trends and lay the groundwork for Hg isotope analyses. To make the comparisons, we 

grouped the colonies into four regions: southeastern Alaska (SE Alaska); the southern Bering 

Sea (SBS); the northern Bering and Chukchi seas (NBS/Chukchi Sea); and Norton Sound. 

Significant regional variation was not detected in the gull eggs (1-way ANOVA, P > 0.05), 

although Hg levels in the SBS were lower than in the NBS/Chukchi Sea and Norton Sound (Fig. 

6). Also, δ15N was significantly higher in the Norton Sound gull eggs, compared to the SBS and 

NBS/Chukchi Sea (Fig. 7). The SBS gull eggs had the highest δ13C levels and the NBS/Chukchi 

Sea eggs had the lowest, while eggs from Norton Sound contained intermediate amounts (Fig. 8). 

When we compared all of the gull eggs together, we found a significant negative correlation 

between Hg and δ13C (P = 0.03), but did not find a correlation between Hg and δ15N. We also 

compared the individual colonies to check geographic variability in Hg, δ15N, δ13C at a higher 

spatial resolution (Fig. 9). Murre eggs clearly had the most distinct geographic Hg pattern, with 

significantly higher levels in Norton Sound and SE Alaska than in the NBS/Chukchi Sea and 

SBS (1-way ANOVA, P < 0.05; see Fig. 6). δ15N was also higher in the Norton Sound murre 

eggs, compared to the other regions, while the SBS had the lowest levels, and SE Alaska and 

NBS/Chukchi Sea had intermediate values (Fig. 7). δ13C also varied geographically, with the 

lowest levels in Norton Sound and the SBS, intermediate values in the NBS/Chukchi Sea, and 

the highest levels in SE Alaska (Fig. 8). When we compared all of the murre eggs together, no 

correlation was present between Hg and δ13C, but we did find a significant positive correlation 

between Hg and δ15N (P = 0.005). 

22 
 

20

18

16

14

12

SE Alaska SBS

Norton Sound NBS/Chukchi Sea

10

ABA A B C A

GULLS MURRES

δ15

N

Figure 7. δ15N in murre and gull eggs among regions. Bars = mean ± 

standard error, and different letters indicate significant differences based on 

1-way ANOVA and Tukey tests. SE Alaska = southeastern Alaska, SBS = 

southeastern Bering Sea, and NBS/Chukchi Sea = northern Bering and 

Chukchi seas. 

GULLS MURRES

‐24

‐23

‐22

‐21

‐20

‐19

‐18

δ13

C

SE Alaska SBS

Norton Sound NBS/Chukchi Sea

A AB B A C C B

Figure 8. δ13C in murre and gull eggs among regions. Bars = mean ± 

standard error, and different letters indicate significant differences based on 

1-way ANOVA and Tukey tests. SE Alaska = southeastern Alaska, SBS = 

southeastern Bering Sea, and NBS/Chukchi Sea = northern Bering and 

Chukchi seas. 

23 
                   

               

350

SBS

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

Aiktak I. Stuart Shaktoolik

Island (South)

(Stebbins)

B AB AB

19
 

SBS
 

18
 

17

16

15

14

13

Aiktak I. Stuart Shaktoolik

Island (South)

D‐F EF A‐E

Norton Sound

AB AB AB

Shaktoolik CapeDarby Carolyn I.

(Golovin

Bay)

Norton Sound

AB A‐C A‐D

Shaktoolik CapeDarby Carolyn I.

(Golovin

NBS/Chukchi Sea

AB AB A AB AB B

Bluff I.	 Safety Sinuk River Brevig Shismaref Kukpuk

Sound Delta Mission Inlet RiverDelta

AB 	 

NBS/Chukchi Sea

A B‐E EF F C‐E

Bluff I. Safety Sinuk River Brevig Shismaref Kukpuk

Sound Delta Mission Inlet RiverDelta

δ13

C

δ15

N Hg (ng/g)

(Stebbins)	 Bay)

‐19

‐20

‐21

‐22

‐23

‐24

‐25

‐26

SBS

D‐F EF A‐E AB A‐C A‐D

Norton Sound

AB A B‐E EF F C‐E

NBS/Chukchi Sea

Figure 9. Hg, δ15N, and δ13C in gull eggs compared among colonies. Colonies are grouped by 

region, starting in the southern Bering Sea (SBS) and progressing northward into Norton Sound 

and the northern Bering and Chukchi seas (NBS/Chukchi Sea). Bars = mean ± standard error, 

and different letters indicate significant differences based on 1-way ANOVA and Tukey tests. 

24 
Hg Isotopes 

The Hg levels that we found in the gull eggs suggested that these seabirds did not have any 

spatially explicit patterns like the murres did. In particular, the gulls in Norton Sound where this 

study was focused did not display consistently different Hg levels, compared to the northern 

Bering and Chukchi sea colonies (Fig. 9). This indicates they are not good biointegrators of 

sources and cycling of Hg. This outcome was not surprising, because gulls are highly migratory 

and have diverse, opportunistic foraging behaviors that include feeding on surface fish, intertidal 

invertebrates, eggs and small chicks, berries and seaweed, and scavenging on terrestrial and 

marine carrion and human refuse (Roseneau et al. 2008, Vander Pol et al. 2009). These factors 

make interpreting contaminant patterns in their eggs much more difficult than it is for murres. 

Given our knowledge of gull biology and the varying amounts of Hg in their eggs, we decided to 

focus the Hg isotope analyses on murres, and exclude gulls from this part of the study. Results of 

the analytical work on the 25 common murre and 20 thick-billed murre eggs from the seven 

representative nesting locations, including the three Norton Sound colonies, are shown in 

Appendix 4. We grouped the data by colony to make it easier to identify geographic patterns in 

Hg isotopic fractionation and compare Hg levels and δ15N and δ13C isotopes in the samples. 

The quality control samples for the Hg isotope analyses agreed with previously published values 

(Table 5), validating our analytical methods. All of the murre eggs showed significant positive 

mass dependent fractionation (MDF) for all of the measured isotopes, and they also displayed 

significant positive mass independent fractionation (MIF) for all measured odd isotopes (Fig. 

10). We plotted Δ199Hg and δ202Hg values against one another to help illustrate separation of 

isotopic patterns among colonies (Fig. 11), and we also summarized the data to statistically 

compare the colonies by calculating their means and checking them with 1-way ANOVA and 

Tukey tests. Hg levels, MIF, and MDF all displayed gradients running from deep within Norton 

Sound (i.e., at Cape Denbigh) westward toward the northern Bering Sea (Fig. 12). Hg levels 

were highest in Norton Sound and lowest in the northern Bering Sea, while Δ199Hg and δ202Hg 

were lowest in Norton Sound and highest in the northern Bering Sea. δ15N and δ13C also 

displayed this gradient, with δ15N highest in Norton Sound and δ13C lowest at its eastern end 

(i.e., at Cape Denbigh; see Fig. 13). We also analyzed samples from two of the more distant 

colonies, St. Lazaria Island in the Gulf of Alaska and St. George Island in the southeastern 

Bering Sea, for comparative purposes. These nesting locations had their own individual patterns 

of Hg, δ202Hg, Δ199Hg, δ15N, and δ13C that differed from the Norton Sound and northern Bering 

Sea colonies (Figs. 12 and 13). We also found significant positive pair-wise correlations (P < 

0.05) between δ202Hg-Δ199Hg, Hg-δ15N, δ13C-δ202Hg, and δ13C-Δ199Hg at the Norton Sound and 

northern Bering Sea nesting locations. In contrast, significant negative pair-wise correlations 

were found between Hg-δ202Hg, Hg-Δ199Hg, δ15N-δ202Hg, δ15N-Δ199Hg, δ13C-Hg, and δ13Cδ15N. Some researchers have used the slope of linear regressions between Δ199Hg and Δ199Hg to 

infer the chemical species of Hg undergoing photoreduction (Bergquist and Blum 2007, Point et 

al. 2011). The overall slope in this study was 1.08 (Fig. 14), which is closer to the experimentally 

derived value for inorganic Hg photoreduction (1.0) than for MeHg photoreduction (1.3). 

25 
δxxx Hg 

2.0
 

200Hg

1.6 199Hg

1.2 

0.8 

0.4 

0.0 

Δ199Hg

0.00	 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25
 

δ202Hg
 

Figure 10. δ200Hg and δ199Hg vs. δ202Hg for all murre and gull eggs showing measured 

values relative to theoretical values based on mass dependent kinetic isotope 

fractionation. The measured values for δ200Hg vs δ202Hg were in agreement with the 

theoretical values, indicating all of the fractionation was mass dependent fractionation 

(MDF), as suggested by the models. However, δ199Hg deviated significantly from the 

theoretical MDF line, indicating that mass independent fractionation (MIF, denoted by 

Δ199Hg) was present in the eggs for odd isotopes. 

26 

1.50 
             

1.6 

St. Lazaria I. St. George I. St. Lawrence I. Little Diomede Norton Sound

0.6 

0.8 

1.0 

1.2 

1.4 

Δ199 Hg 

0.4 

0.20	 0.45 0.70 0.95 1.20 

δ202Hg 

Figure 11. A three Hg isotope diagram showing colony separations by their Δ199Hg vs δ202Hg 

signatures. 

27 
1.1

1.2

1.3

         

Denbigh Diomede I.

   

I.

II

             

             

Δ199Hg Hg (ng/g)

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

A A C C C BC B

SE 

Alaska 

South 

Bering 

Sea 

St. Lazaria I. St. George I. Cape Bluff Sledge I. Little St. Lawrence

Denbigh Diomede I. I.

A B AB AB B B C

I 

SE 

Alaska 

South 

Bering 

Sea 

St. Lazaria I. St. George I. Cape Bluff Sledge I. Little St. Lawrence

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

δ202Hg

III 

A BC BC C ABC ABC AB

SE 

Alaska 

South 

Bering 

Sea 

St. Lazaria I. St.George I. CapeDenbigh Bluff Sledge I. Little St. Lawrence

Diomede I. I.

Figure 12. Hg (I), MIF (II), and MDF (III) gradients between the 

Norton Sound and northern Bering Sea regions. Bars = mean ± standard 

error, and different letters indicate significant differences based on 1­

way ANOVA and Tukey tests. 

28 
         

Diomede I.

   

I.

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

δ15

N

C D A A AB B C

SE 

Alaska 

South 

Bering 

Sea 

St. Lazaria I. St.George I. Cape Denbigh Bluff Sledge I. Little St. Lawrence

Figure 13. δ15N and δ13C gradients between the Norton Sound and northern Bering Sea 

regions. Bars = mean ± standard error, and different letters indicate significant differences 

based on 1-way ANOVA and Tukey tests. 

‐24

‐23

‐22

‐21

‐20

‐19

‐18

δ13

C

A CD D BC ABC ABC AB

SE 

Alaska 

South 

Bering 

Sea 

29 
       

    Δ199Hg

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

y = 1.0776x + 0.1083

R2 = 0.9414

0.2

0.0

0.0 0.2 	 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

Δ201Hg

Figure 14. Slope of the linear regression between Δ199Hg and Δ201Hg. This slope is 

sometimes used to infer the chemical species of Hg undergoing photoreduction (e.g., see 

Blum and Berquist 2007, Point et al. 2011). The overall slope of this relationship in this 

study was 1.08, which is closer to the experimentally derived value for inorganic Hg 

photoreduction (1.0) than for MeHg photoreduction (1.3). 

Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) 

QA/QC and General Results 

Percent lipid and mass fractions of organochlorine pesticides, and mass fractions of PBDEs and 

PCBs in the murre egg control material are listed in Appendices 5 and 6, and colony, species, 

and year results are summarized in Appendices 7-30 and 31-54, respectively. Values for 

organochlorine contaminants varied from below detection limits (< 0.00117 ng g-1) to 391 ng g-1 

wet mass for 4,4’-DDE in one glaucous gull egg from Stuart Island in Norton Sound (egg 

number 1420; see Appendices 2 and 29). RSDs at the colonies varied between 0.99 % and 210 % 

(mean = 39.5 %). 

While most control material levels were within consensus value ranges (Appendices 5 and 6), 

many of the PCBs levels were lower, as reported by an earlier study (Vander Pol 2007). Also, as 

reported before, PCB congeners 199 and 201 were above consensus values because of interfering 

peaks. The duplicate analyses of gull eggs 1340 and 1403 (see above and Appendix 2) resulted in 

differences of less that 10 %, indicating our fresh homogenization procedures produced wellmixed samples (Appendices 22, 27, 46, and 51). 

30 
 

 

 

 

 

St. Lazaria I. COMU 2008 

St. Lazaria I. TBMU 2008 

Aiktak I. GWGU 2009 

St. George I. COMU 2009 

St. George I. TBMU 2008 

St. Paul I. TBMU 2009 

St. Lawrence I. COMU 2008 

St. Lawrence I. TBMU 2008 

Stuart I. GLGU 2009 

Shaktoolik GLGU 2008 

Shaktoolik GLGU 2009 

Cape Denbigh COMU 2009 

Cape Darby GLGU 2008 

Carolyn I. GLGU 2008 

Bluff GLGU 2008 

Bluff COMU 2008 

Safety Sound GLGU 2008 

Sledge I. COMU 2008 

Sinuk R. delta 

 2008 

Brevig Mi ssion

GLGU

 GLGU 2009 

Li ttle Diomede I. TBMU 2008 

Shishmaref Inlet GLGU 2008 

Kukpuk R. delta GLGU 2008 

Cape Lisburne UNMU 2009 

Although percent lipids were significantly different among colonies (MANOVA F15,62 = 26.1, P 

< 0.0001), they did not differ among the murre nesting locations (Fig. 15). Gulls were lower than 

murres, and the Safety Sound gull eggs contained the lowest lipid levels. % Li pid 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

12 

A A A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

C 

CD CD CD 

AB 

CD 

CD C 

A 

D 

A 

BC 

CD 

A 

C 

CD 

A 

Figure 15. Percent lipid in common murre (COMU), thick-billed murre (TBMU), glaucous gull 

(GLGU), and glaucous-winged gull (GWGU) eggs collected at 19 Alaskan colonies in 2008­

2009. Significant differences (P < 0.05) among sites are shown by different letters (e.g., Bluff 

GLGU 2008 [C] differed from Safety Sound GLGU 2008 [D]). 

31 
Regional Comparisons 

The Norton Sound common murre eggs from Sledge Island, Bluff, and Cape Denbigh were 

significantly different from the St. Lawrence and St. George island common murre eggs (Fig. 16; 

MANOVA F11,18 = 7.12, P < 0.0001). Although the Norton Sound cis-nonachlor, HCB, mirex, 

octacholorstyrene, and BDE 47 levels were higher than those found in the Bering Sea, the 

remaining compounds did not differ between these regions (P > 0.05). However, the Norton 

Sound (Sinuk River delta, Safety Sound, Bluff, Cape Darby, Shaktoolik, and Carolyn and Stuart 

islands) and Bering and Chukchi sea (Brevig Mission, Shishmaref Inlet, and Kukpuk River delta) 

gull eggs contained lower levels of β-HCH, cis-nonachlor, HCB, heptachlor epoxide, mirex, 

oxychlordane, ΣPCBs, and BDE 47 than the Bering and Chukchi sea eggs did (Fig. 16; 

MANOVA F11,40 = 5.25, P < 0.0001). 

We ran a MANOVA on all of the colonies and it was also significant (F253,855= 5.94, P < 

0.0001), as were all of the ANOVAs run on individual compounds (P < 0.0001; see Table 6). 

The first two principal components (PC) of the PCA accounted for 65.0 % of the total variation 

(Fig. 17). The first PC explained 48.1 % of the variation and was separated by the 

organochlorine pesticides: octachlorostyrene, HCB, pentachlorobenzene, and β-HCH on the 

lower end, and the penta- to hepta-PCB congeners on the upper end. The second PC explained 

another 16.9 % of the variation and had higher proportions of heptachlor epoxide, mirex, 

oxychlordane, cis-nonachlor, and penta-PCB congeners on the higher end, and 4,4’-DDE and 

hexa- to octa-PCB congeners on the lower end. 

Species Comparisons 

Species differences were significant (MANOVA F11,18 = 2.62, P = 0.0339), with levels of 

heptachlor epoxide, pentachlorobenzene, and β-HCH higher in the common murre eggs than in 

the thick-billed murre eggs. We checked to see if this pattern was also present among the 

colonies, but only the St. George Island eggs differed between species. However, these eggs 

were collected in different years (2008 and 2009), and when we removed this location from our 

calculations, the MANOVA was no longer significant (F11,8 = 2.46, P = 0.106). 

Temporal Comparisons 

Temporal variations at St. George and St. Lazaria islands are shown in Fig. 18. Declines in the 

levels of 4,4’-DDE and mirex in the St. Lazaria common and thick-billed murre eggs and HCB, 

and oxychlordane in the St. George and St. Lazaria island thick-billed murre eggs were 

significant, and the increase in mirex in the St. George Island thick-billed murre eggs was also 

significant. 

32 
 

4,4'-DDE 

HCB 

Pentachlorobenzene 

Octachlorosytrene 

Oxychlordane 

Heptachlor epoxide 

Mirex 

BD

 

PCBs 

-HCH 

Cis-nonachlor 

Mas s Fra c tion (ng g -1 l i pid ma ss ) 

0 

1000 2000 3000 4000 

Bering Sea COMUs Norton Sound COMUs Bering & Chukchi seas GLGUs Norton Sound GLGUs 

* 

* 

* * 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Figure 16. Geographic comparisons (means ± 95 % confidence intervals) for common murre (COMU) eggs coll(St. George and St. Lawrence islands) and Norton Sound (Bluff, Cape Denbigh, and Sledge Island) coloni(GLGU) eggs collected from Chukchi Sea (Kukpuk River delta, Shishmaref Inlet), Bering Sea (Brevig Missio(Sinuk River delta, Safety Sound, Bluff, Cape Darby, Shaktoolik, and Carolyn and Stuart islands) nesting lo

indicate the MANOVAs were significant (P < 0.05). 

33 
 

 

St. Lazaria I. COMU 2008 

St. Lazaria I. TBMU 2009 

Aiktak I. GWGU 2009 

St. George I. COMU 2009 

St. George I. TBMU 2008 

St. Paul I. TBMU 2009 

St. Lawrence I. COMU 2008 

St. Lawrence I. TBMU 2008 

Sinuk R. delta GLGU 2009 

Sledge I. COMU 2008 

Safety Sound GLGU 2008 

Bluff COMU 2008 

Bluff GLGU 2008 

Carolyn I. GLGU 2008 

Cape Darby GLGU 2008 

Cape Denbigh COMU 2009 

Shaktoolik GLGU 2008 

Shaktoolik GLGU 2009 

Stuart I. GLGU 2009 

Heptachlor epoxide, Mirex 0.10 

Oxychlordane, cis-nonachlor, 5-Cl-PCBs 

0.05 

0.00 

-0.05 

-0.10 

-0.15 

-0.20 

-0.25 

4,4'-DDE -0.30 

6-Cl- to 8-Cl-PCBs 

-0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 

Octachlorostyrene, HCB, 5-Cl- to 7-Cl-PCBs PC 1 - 48.1 % of the variation 

PC 2 - 16.9 % of the variation 

Little Diomede I. TBMU 2008 

Brevig Mission GLGU 2009 

Shishmaref Inlet GLGU 2008 

Kukpuk R. delta GLGU 2008 

Cape Lisburne UNMU 2009 

Figure 17. Principal components analyses for organochlorine pesticides and polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCBs) in common murre (COMU), thick-billed murre (TBMU), glaucous gull 

(GLGU), and glaucous-winged gull (GWGU) eggs collected at 19 Alaskan colonies in 2008­

2009. Compounds that contribute to the loadings are shown along the axes. 

34 
Table 6. Mass fractions (ng g-1 lipid mass) of major contaminants in murre and gull eggs (means 

± confidence intervals and ranges are shown in parentheses; colonies not sharing letters differed 

significantly based on Tukey-Kramer Post-hoc tests). 

BDE 47 16PCBs 4,4'-DDE β-HCH HCB Pentachlorobenzene 

F-Ratio 5.25 7.34 4.88 4.53 6.84 15.4 

P <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 

St. Lazaria I. COMU 2008 159 ± 176 B 1051 ± 778 B-F 1580 ± 810 AB 144 ± 40 C 280 ± 53 F-G 7.34 ± 1.3 H 

(39.8 - 515) (408 - 2565) (938 - 3180) (81.9 - 210) (214 - 370) (6.06 - 9.65) 

St. Lazaria I. TBMU2008 159 ± 176 B 648 ± 255 C-F 1490 ± 370 AB 107 ± 27 C 280 ± 14 F-G 8.30 ± 2.0 H 

(39.8 - 515) (345 - 1035) (1110 - 2140) (66.8 - 151) (267 - 308) (5.48 - 11.1) 

Aiktak I. GWGU 2009 31.8 ± 25 B 1510 ± 1092 B-F 1720 ± 1800 AB 209 ± 110 BC 299 ± 110 E-G 18.4 ± 7.6 D-H 

(6.78 - 79.0) (343 - 3578) (249 - 5230) (62.0 - 406) (90.8 - 390) (8.42 - 28.1) 

St. George I. COMU 2009 3.63 ± 1.3 B 280 ± 21 E-F 389 ± 33 B 245 ± 60 A-C 457 ± 28 C-G 28.7 ± 9.7 C-F 

(1.22 - 5.20) (240 - 296) (335 - 441) (175 - 341) (418 - 504) (12.7 - 41.3) 

St. George I. TBMU 2008 3.89 ± 1.9 B 415 ± 99 D-F 1000 ± 110 B 82.6 ± 17 C 234 ± 50 G 6.47 ± 2.8 H 

(1.80 - 6.63) (294 - 581) (867 - 1170) (59.3 - 108) (175 - 292) (1.55 - 9.81) 

St. Paul I. TBMU 2009 2.20 ± 1.2 B 220 ± 63 F 497 ± 170 B 160 ± 55 C 376 ± 87 D-G 31.8 ± 11 C-E 

(0.847 - 3.79) (120 - 296) (303 - 809) (84.7 - 256) (261 - 524) (16.1 - 45.6) 

St. Lawrence I. COMU 2008 3.18 ± 0.58 B 357 ± 28 EF 488 ± 110 B 105 ± 29 C 376 ± 140 D-G 14.3 ± 4.5 E-H 

(2.44 - 3.93) (327 - 402) (378 - 631) (65.6 - 136) (205 - 558) (9.95 - 21.0) 

St. Lawrence I. TBMU 2008 3.78 ± 1.9 B 384 ± 79 EF 412 ± 81 B 117 ± 67 C 536 ± 57 A-G 13.8 ± 2.9 E-H 

(1.80 - 6.25) (256 - 461) (280 - 523) (0.920 - 205) (452 - 623) (10.1 - 18.9) 

Sinuk R. delta GLGU 2008 24.7 ± 4.8 B 1837 ± 460 A-F 1580 ± 410 AB 199 ± 78 C 513 ± 86 B-G 9.85 ± 3.3 F-H 

(15.8 - 30.2) (1370 - 2565) (1030 - 2160) (111 - 327) (376 - 632) (3.37 - 12.8) 

Sledge I. COMU 2008 9.06 ± 1.8 B 448 ± 135 D-F 426 ± 46 B 202 ± 70 C 557 ± 120 A-G 11.7 ± 2.1 F-H 

(6.68 - 11.2) (314 - 658) (360 - 469) (121 - 332) (390 - 726) (7.96 - 13.9) 

Safety Sound GLGU 2008 31.6 ± 8.3 B 2256 ± 818 A-E 1990 ± 840 AB 297 ± 190 A-C 832 ± 320 A-C 12.8 ± 5.6 E-H 

(20.1 - 39.7) (1139 - 2900) (867 - 2800) (142 - 559) (564 - 1240) (8.16 - 20.9) 

Bluff COMU 2008 8.01 ± 2.8 B 490 ± 146 D-F 405 ± 79 B 203 ± 58 C 536 ± 160 A-G 9.76 ± 2.4 GH 

(3.78 - 12.5) (311 - 762) (316 - 555) (106 - 263) (385 - 846) (7.33 - 14.2) 

Bluff GLGU 2008 72.4 ± 37 B 1702 ± 486 A-F 1430 ± 360 AB 182 ± 53 C 533 ± 84 A-G 14.1 ± 2.9 E-H 

(19.4 - 106) (1195 - 2357) (1050 - 1900) (125 - 241) (453 - 654) (10.9 - 17.6) 

Carolyn I.GLGU 2008 21.8 ± 7.7 B 1811 ± 406 A-F 1580 ± 360 AB 188 ± 49 C 580 ± 120 A-G 9.64 ± 5.5 GH 

(13.1 - 35.6) (1144 - 2295) (986 - 1960) (107 - 244) (380 - 714) (3.77 - 17.9) 

Cape Darby GLGU 2008 21.4 ± 6.0 B 1863 ± 817 A-F 1720 ± 570 AB 186 ± 25 C 582 ± 62 A-G 10.7 ± 1.6 F-H 

(12.1 -29.7) (982 - 3393) (990 - 2740) (138 - 208) (488 - 682) (7.58 - 12.3) 

Cape Denbigh COMU 2009 6.06 ± 1.7 B 292 ± 40 EF 343 ± 42 B 187 ± 55 C 558 ± 35 A-G 28.3 ± 5.2 C-G 

(3.51 - 8.95) (256 - 344) (269 - 386) (92.3 - 241) (493 - 596) (19.6 - 33.7) 

Shaktoolik GLGU 2008 27.5 ± 5.6 B 2103 ± 627 A-F 1600 ± 590 AB 271 ± 43 A-C 784 ± 190 A-C 18.9 ± 5.2 D-H 

(20.2 - 34.2) (1384 - 2827) (1040 - 2260) (231 - 330) (555 - 981) (12.8 - 25.2) 

Shaktoolik GLGU 2009 33.8 ± 27 B 1750 ± 451 A-F 1870 ± 440 AB 212 ± 78 BC 654 ± 81 A-E 56.2 ± 14 A 

(14.2 - 86.8) (1124 - 2519) (1440 - 2510) (77.9 - 315) (515 - 765) (38.9 - 78.3) 

Stuart I. GLGU 2009 29.6 ± 11 B 2267 ± 1853 A-D 3520 ± 2600 A 235 ± 150 A-C 466 ± 260 C-G 35.2 ± 16 B-D 

(17.5 - 44.1) (353 - 4635) (1020 - 6960) (54.3 - 416) (133 - 696) (12.9 - 53.2) 

Little Diomede I. TBMU 2008 5.43 ± 0.82 B 486 ± 54 D-F 496 ± 30 B 196 ± 19 C 623 ± 83 A-F 16.9 ± 4.2 D-H 

(4.18 - 6.76) (420 - 555) (448 - 531) (166 - 221) (478 - 713) (12.3 - 24.2) 

Brevig Mission GLGU 2009 38.1 ± 6.8 B 2844 ± 659 AB 3470 ± 1100 A 448 ± 120 A 876 ± 190 AB 53.7 ± 7.7 AB 

(26.0 - 46.1) (1751 - 3676) (1990 - 4970) (229 - 619) (527 - 1090) (46.3 - 68.1) 

Shismaref Inlet GLGU 2008 284 ± 505 B 2405 ± 632 A-C 2000 ± 330 AB 271 ± 30 A-C 667 ± 61 A-D 19.8 ± 5.0 D-H 

(20.6 - 1314) (1655 - 3497) (1600 - 2400) (225 - 319) (582 - 745) (11.3 - 25.8) 

Kukpuk R. delta GLGU 2008 1529 ± 1162 A 3457 ± 1679 A 2560 ± 1500 AB 421 ± 170 AB 886 ± 310 A 20.4 ± 8.0 D-H 

(81.1 - 2700) (1975 - 5737) (1280 - 4660) (273 - 655) (597 - 1290) (11.3 - 34.6) 

Cape Lisburne UNMU 2009 2.98 ± 1.6 B 333 ± 72 EF 437 ± 65 B 216 ± 60 BC 627 ± 110 A-F 41.5 ± 9.4 A-C 

(1.15 - 6.05) (268 - 477) (322 - 504) (154 - 322) (470 - 799) (31.8 - 57.1) 

35 
Table 6. (Continued). 

Cis -nonachlor Heptachlor epoxide Mirex Octachlorosytrene Oxychlordane 

F-Ratio 3.69 12.6 6.42 4.77 8.72 

P <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 

St. Lazaria I. COMU 2008 22.2 ± 28 A-C 27.2 ± 16 D-H 14.0 ± 5.2 BC 8.86 ± 1.7 CD 49.1 ± 13 D 

(3.25 - 78.7) (11.1 - 57.4) (7.60 - 23.1) (6.63 - 11.6) (28.0 - 70.6) 

St. Lazaria I. TBMU2008 4.61 ± 3.0 C 14.2 ± 5.1 GH 13.9 ± 2.3 BC 9.66 ± 1.4 CD 33.8 ± 3.9 D 

(0.768 - 9.18) (8.95 - 23.4) (10.1 - 16.7) (8.30 - 11.5) (29.0 - 41.0) 

Aiktak I. GWGU 2009 19.0 ± 6.7 BC 72.9 ± 27 B-E 58.8 ± 42 A-C 6.38 ± 2.9 D 219 ± 140 CD 

(11.4 - 29.5) (36.8 - 121) (10.2 - 136) (2.05 - 11.3) (51.1 - 481) 

St. George I. COMU 2009 9.63 ± 1.7 BC 30.4 ± 2.3 C-H 10.8 ± 1.5 C 12.6 ± 0.56 A-D 42.8 ± 5.9 D 

(6.82 - 11.4) (26.7 - 33.5) (8.08 - 12.7) (12.0 - 13.6) (34.5 - 49.2) 

St. George I. TBMU 2008 4.67 ± 2.6 C 12.7 ± 1.6 H 12.4 ± 1.9 C 9.54 ± 1.2 CD 40.7 ± 7.7 D 

(1.41 - 7.52) (10.5 - 15.0) (9.85 - 15.3) (8.03 - 11.4) (31.6 - 55.2) 

St. Paul I. TBMU 2009 8.62 ± 2.2 C 25.9 ± 8.5 E-H 8.43 ± 2.1 C 9.04 ± 1.3 CD 36.6 ± 10 D 

(5.94 - 12.4) (18.1 - 41.2) (4.39 - 10.5) (7.66 - 11.1) (22.0 - 49.8) 

St. Lawrence I. COMU 2008 5.27 ± 1.4 C 13.8 ± 2.4 GH 9.83 ± 1.9 C 11.8 ± 3.0 A-D 40.7 ± 8.8 D 

(2.84 - 7.19) (10.4 - 16.9) (7.28 - 12.7) (8.47 - 15.8) (24.8 - 50.8) 

St. Lawrence I. TBMU 2008 6.09 ± 2.1 C 16.0 ± 5.9 F-H 13.3 ± 2.3 C 16.1 ± 2.3 A-C 49.1 ± 13 D 

(3.07 - 8.64) (10.3 - 26.3) (10.4 - 16.9) (12.4 - 18.4) (30.4 - 63.0) 

Sinuk R. delta GLGU 2008 30.0 ± 8.0 A-C 56.4 ± 9.7 B-H 48.2 ± 13 A-C 10.3 ± 1.5 B-D 247 ± 64 CD 

(18.9 - 43.1) (44.2 - 70.1) (31.7 - 70.8) (8.24 - 12.6) (157 - 338) 

Sledge I. COMU 2008 20.5 ± 18 BC 35.1 ± 23 C-H 17.7 ± 5.5 BC 16.3 ± 4.2 A-C 52.7 ± 13 D 

(9.33 - 58.0) (17.9 - 82.0) (12.2 - 27.2) (12.2 - 23.3) (39.6 - 77.8) 

Safety Sound GLGU 2008 40.5 ± 13 A-C 88.9 ± 26 BC 59.7 ± 20 A-C 16.0 ± 5.3 A-C 324 ± 100 A-D 

(27.0 - 58.0) (65.6 - 120) (37.1 - 82.2) (10.4 - 21.8) (176 - 415) 

Bluff COMU 2008 23.1 ± 21 A-C 31.0 ± 16 C-H 26.4 ± 8.7 BC 16.4 ± 6.1 A-C 52.1 ± 13 D 

(5.08 - 65.0) (9.21 - 57.1) (15.7 - 42.3) (10.7 - 28.0) (36.9 - 72.6) 

Bluff GLGU 2008 31.0 ± 4.8 A-C 67.8 ± 16 B-H 48.6 ± 17 A-C 10.4 ± 1.4 A-D 261 ± 83 B-D 

(26.0 - 37.7) (55.2 - 89.3) (32.0 - 71.3) (8.86 - 12.3) (181 - 352) 

Carolyn I.GLGU 2008 45.1 ± 12 A-C 69.6 ± 16 B-G 45.2 ± 11 A-C 12.4 ± 3.1 A-D 260 ± 80 CD 

(30.7 - 64.5) (48.2 - 90.7) (25.2 - 57.2) (8.22 - 17.2) (158 - 402) 

Cape Darby GLGU 2008 38.4 ± 11 A-C 67.4 ± 7.5 B-H 52.4 ± 22 A-C 12.3 ± 2.4 A-D 248 ± 70 CD 

(26.4 - 52.2) (57.2 - 80.8) (27.1 - 92.7) (10.3 - 16.8) (154 - 359) 

Cape Denbigh COMU 2009 14.2 ± 4.7 BC 26.6 ± 6.4 E-H 15.4 ± 3.9 BC 15.0 ± 1.1 A-C 37.9 ± 9.5 D 

(8.68 - 22.3) (17.2 - 33.6) (10.1 - 20.4) (13.2 - 16.2) (28.0 - 54.7) 

Shaktoolik GLGU 2008 43.2 ± 15 A-C 87.1 ± 6.8 BC 63.0 ± 13 A-C 14.2 ± 3.0 A-D 287 ± 37 B-D 

(27.3 - 64.7) (81.0 - 96.3) (43.8 - 71.3) (11.2 - 17.5) (250 - 322) 

Shaktoolik GLGU 2009 31.9 ± 11 A-C 99.0 ± 23 B 53.6 ± 16 A-C 12.2 ± 1.9 A-D 391 ± 120 A-C 

(15.6 - 49.8) (62.0 - 126) (28.9 - 80.9) (10.0 - 14.8) (200 - 564) 

Stuart I. GLGU 2009 34.5 ± 19 A-C 83.0 ± 51 B-D 69.4 ± 63 AB 10.0 ± 5.3 CD 349 ± 290 A-D 

(11.3 - 58.4) (21.1 - 138) (5.70 - 148) (3.37 - 15.7) (18.7 - 701) 

Little Diomede I. TBMU 2008 12.5 ± 3.4 BC 25.1 ± 5.6 E-H 15.8 ± 2.4 BC 17.9 ± 3.2 AB 56.7 ± 8.2 D 

(7.82 - 17.9) (18.7 - 34.1) (12.3 - 19.5) (11.7 - 20.7) (48.3 - 69.9) 

Brevig Mission GLGU 2009 57.2 ± 30 AB 169 ± 50 A 98.7 ± 29 A 15.3 ± 1.9 A-C 584 ± 170 AB 

(30.1 - 110) (80.3 - 233) (51.8 - 143) (11.6 - 17.2) (325 - 854) 

Shismaref Inlet GLGU 2008 35.3 ± 6.7 A-C 71.7 ± 7.8 B-F 55.4 ± 8.8 A-C 11.1 ± 2.0 A-D 305 ± 70 B-D 

(26.0 - 44.9) (57.4 - 81.0) (43.0 - 64.2) (9.16 - 13.8) (203 - 381) 

Kukpuk R. delta GLGU 2008 69.7 ± 60 A 99.5 ± 36 B 85.8 ± 37 A 10.0 ± 2.7 CD 637 ± 370 A 

(19.0 - 150) (66.6 - 150) (52.1 - 134) (7.17 - 13.5) (310 - 1140) 

Cape Lisburne UNMU 2009 13.3 ± 2.1 BC 33.4 ± 5.9 C-H 13.3 ± 4.2 C 18.4 ± 2.8 A 61.2 ± 11 D 

(10.3 - 16.2) (27.9 - 44.7) (8.37 - 20.9) (14.5 - 21.9) (43.0 - 78.0) 

36 
-1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8PCBs 4,4'-DDE 

0 

500 

1000 

1500 

2000 

2500 

3000 

3500 

r 

2 = 0.23, 

P = 0.0013 

r 

2 = 0.21, P = 0.0358 

r 

2 = 0.09, P = 0.226

Mass Fraction (ng g-1 lipid mass) 

0 

200 

400 

600 

800 

1000 

1200 

1400 

1600 

1800 

r 

2 = 0.02, P = 0.533 

r 

2 = 0.05, 

P = 0.320 

r 

2 = 0.06, 

P = 0.119 

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 

Year Year 

HCB Oxychlordane 

700 

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 

100 

600 

500 

100 

200 

300 

400 

r 

2 = 0.39, P = 0.0040 

r 

2 = 0.01, P = 0.783 

r 

2 = 0.12, 

P = 0.0256 

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

90 

r 

2 = 0.23, 

P = 0.0287 

r 

2 = 0.06, 

P = 0.103 

r 

2 = 0.21, P = 0.0483 

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 

Year Year

Mirex Hg

40 300 Mass Fraction (ng g wet mass) 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

r

2

 = 0.33, P = 0.0105 

r 

2 = 0.18, P = 0.0048 

r 

2 = 0.28, 

P = 0.0119 

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 

Year 

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

r 

2 = 0.0002, 

P = 0.922 

r 

2 = 0.024, 

P = 0.505 

r 

2 = 0.36, 

P = 0.0065 

Year 

Figure 18. Temporal comparisons (means ± 95 % confidence intervals) for St. Lazaria Island 

common murre (red circles and solid regression lines) and thick-billed murre (red squares and 

dashed regression lines) eggs and St. George thick-billed murre eggs (blue squares and 

dashed-dot regression lines). Mass Fraction (ng g-1 lipid mass) Mass Fraction (ng g-1 lipid mass) 

37 
Discussion 

Mercury (Hg) and Hg, Carbon (C), and Nitrogen (N) Isotopes 

Taxonomic Comparisons of Hg Levels and δ15N and δ13C 

The Hg levels found in the Norton Sound, northern Bering Sea, southeastern Bering Sea, and 

southeastern Gulf of Alaska murre and gull eggs were consistent with the previously reported 

values from these regions (e.g., see Roseneau et al. 2008, Day et al. 2006, and Day et al. in 

prep.). Gulls had higher Hg values than murres did across the entire sampling area, and also 

within the regions where we obtained both kinds of eggs. Foraging differences between these 

taxa (see Results above) expose them to different environmental reservoirs of Hg, which affects 

assimilation rates. The complementary δ15N and δ13C data, which reflect the nitrogen and carbon 

pools that the birds were relying on, support this scenario. 

Because many species are euryphagic or have poorly characterized feeding habits, measuring 

δ15N is often the most effective method for determining trophic levels of organisms. Numerous 

food web studies have documented positive relationships between Hg levels in organisms and 

the trophic levels (calculated from δ15N) they were feeding at (e.g., see Jarman et al. 1996, 

Atwell et al. 1998, Campbell et al. 2005, Chasar et al. 2009, Chumchal and Hambright 2009, 

Dietz et al. 2009, and Jaegar et al. 2009). This technique of identifying trophic levels is based on 

the sequential enrichment of 15N relative to 14N by 3 ‰ to 5 ‰ at each increasing level. Higher 

levels of δ15N in the gull eggs indicated these birds were foraging on higher trophic level prey, 

which typically bioaccumulate more Hg. This trend was present in the southern Bering Sea, but 

not in the northern Bering and Chukchi Sea, and in Norton Sound, the murre eggs actually had 

higher average δ15N values than the gull eggs did, indicating that the higher Hg levels found in 

these regions were related to other factors, not trophic levels. 

δ13C has been used to differentiate between terrestrial/benthic and oceanic/pelagic carbon 

sources. Carbon from terrestrial/benthic sources is typically more depleted (i.e., it has lower, 

more negative δ13C signatures) than carbon from oceanic/pelagic sources (e.g. ,see Fernandes 

and Sicre 2000, Guo et al. 2004, Dunton et al. 2006). Like nitrogen data, δ13C signatures can 

help identify differences in foraging habits of species. However, the relative Hg uptake by 

consumers in different habitats is not always well-characterized, and likely varies between given 

ecosystems and sites. Some studies have shown that benthic habitats can often be more enriched 

in MeHg than the overlying water columns, and it is also generally accepted that estuarine and 

coastal environments are efficient at methylating Hg and may be sources of MeHg for more 

oceanic offshore areas (Fitzgerald et al. 2007). This information suggests that, all other things 

being equal, more depleted terrestrial/benthic δ13C signatures should be associated with higher 

Hg levels. This is consistent with the trend found in the 2008-2009 data sets, which showed that 

the higher Hg levels in the gull eggs were accompanied by more depleted terrestrial δ13C 

signatures than the ones associated with the murre eggs. The exception was the southern Bering 

Sea, but the gull eggs from this region contained much higher δ15N values, and consequently still 

had higher Hg levels than the murre eggs did. The combination of trophic levels and habitat/prey 

selections appear to influence Hg patterns in taxa, reinforcing the importance of including δ15N 

and δ13C analyses in long-term contaminant monitoring programs. 

38 
Regional Comparisons of Hg Levels and δ15N and δ13C 

Gull eggs did not exhibit any definitive regional Hg trend in Norton Sound, and levels were 

similar to values found in the northern Bering and Chukchi sea eggs (Fig. 9). As mentioned 

earlier (see the section on taxonomic comparisons above), gulls are opportunistic, foraging on a 

broad range of prey, and the abundance and availability of potential food items can also vary 

markedly among nesting locations. For example, birds nesting at one colony might feed on a 

combination surface fish in open ocean waters and invertebrates in estuaries and intertidal zones, 

and birds breeding at another might forage on terrestrial berries and bird eggs and also consume 

human refuse at a nearby community dump site. These factors almost certainly cause 

inconsistencies in the integration of Hg, confounding analyses. δ15N was significantly higher in 

the Norton Sound gull eggs than it was in the northern Bering – Chukchi Sea and southern 

Bering Sea eggs, but trophic levels did not appear to be related to the Hg levels in these samples. 

This was further supported by the fact that these variables did not appear to be related in the gull 

data set. However, we did find significant negative correlations between δ13C and Hg, again 

suggesting that terrestrial/benthic carbon sources were associated with the higher Hg levels 

found in these eggs. 

The correlation between Hg and δ13C in the gull eggs was subtle in the colony-by-colony data. 

The most prominent relationships occurred at Aiktak Island and the Kukpuk River delta, where 

low Hg and high δ13C levels were found in the eggs. Aiktak Island is located just south of the 

eastern entrance to Unimak Pass near the trajectory of the south-flowing, oceanic Alaskan 

Stream (e.g., see Reed 1968, Mundy et al. 2010), so it was not surprising that the eggs from this 

site displayed the most pelagic/oceanic δ13C signatures. 

The Kukpuk River delta gull colony is located near the base of the Point Hope Spit on a broad 

expanse of land jutting out into the eastern Chukchi Sea. This nesting location is surrounded by 

wetlands, but the δ13C data suggested the birds breeding at it were relying on more oceanic 

carbon sources with relatively low Hg levels. The gull colonies that produced eggs with the most 

depleted, terrestrial/benthic δ13C values were located in Shishmaref Inlet about 120 km north of 

Bering Strait along the eastern Chukchi Sea shore; near Brevig Mission on the southwestern side 

of the Seward Peninsula, about 65 km east of Bering Strait; in the Sinuk River delta near the 

northwestern entrance to Norton Sound, about 40 km west of Nome; on the southern side of 

Stuart Island in southern Norton Sound, about 65 km east of the Yukon River’s northern mouth; 

and at Shaktoolik South at the eastern end of Norton Sound, about 20 km southeast of Cape 

Denbigh (Fig. 3). The Shishmaref, Brevig Mission, and Shaktoolik South colonies are all located 

near coastal lagoons and bays that provide estuarine foraging habitats for the nesting birds. Eggs 

from the other nesting locations along the northern shores of Norton Sound east of Nome (i.e., at 

Safety Sound, Bluff, Cape Darby, and Carolyn Island in Golovin Bay; see Fig. 3) had 

intermediate to low δ13C values. Eggs from these colonies also had high δ15N signatures (Fig. 9), 

indicating the birds breeding in this part of the sound were feeding at higher trophic levels, 

compared to birds nesting at the other locations. However, murre eggs from this same area also 

had elevated δ15N signatures, suggesting the presence of a locally elevated δ15N source in this 

part of the embayment’s marine ecosystem. 

39 
Gull eggs from the Sinuk River delta and Shaktoolik South colonies had the highest Hg levels 

(Figs. 3 and 9). However, these samples did not have distinctive δ15N or δ13C signatures, 

indicating there may be localized sources of Hg in their vicinities. Although the Sinuk River 

drains part of the Seward Peninsula where some placer gold mining has occurred, we are not 

aware of any historical or present day efforts to extract this resource from the Shaktoolik area. 

More information is required to identify the sources of contamination in these widely separated 

locales. 

The international Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) recommended that 

murre eggs should be used to monitor heavy metals in circumpolar environments because of the 

distribution and life history traits of these seabirds (AMAP 1998, 1999). Previous studies by 

STAMP have confirmed that these tissues can be used to identify geographic and temporal 

differences in Hg levels in Alaskan marine environments (Day et al. 2006 and Roseneau et al. 

2008; also see Day et al. in prep). During this project, we collected murre eggs from several 

previously sampled locations both inside and outside of the Norton Sound – Bering Strait study 

area to reconfirm the presence of the large-scale geographic pattern reported in 2008 (Roseneau 

et al. 2008) and better describe Hg distribution in this northeastern Bering Sea region. Regional 

comparisons encompassing all of the sampled murre locations and higher resolution colony-bycolony Hg isotope information are discussed below. 

We previously reported that Gulf of Alaska common and thick-billed murre eggs had higher Hg 

levels than Bering Sea eggs (Day et al. 2006), and we suggested these regional trends resulted 

from different Hg deposition and/or methylation regimes. However, we were not able to 

eliminate potential food web effects and the possibility of a sampling artifact introduced by a 

bias toward the presence of more oceanic insular colonies in the Bering Sea and more coastal 

colonies in the Gulf of Alaska. We recently began addressing these issues by analyzing eggs 

from more sampling sites in Norton Sound and the Bering and Chukchi seas and Gulf of Alaska, 

and measuring the δ15N and δ13C signatures in them to help clarify the effects of trophic position 

and habitat utilization on Hg exposure (Day et al. in prep). During this work, we were able to 

confirm that trophic levels influenced the geographic pattern, and we also discovered that the 

Gulf of Alaska was apparently richer in Hg than the Bering Sea. Furthermore, these finding 

appeared to be independent of the inshore/offshore locations of the colonies, with one 

exception—Norton Sound. Murre eggs from this northeastern Bering Sea embayment contained 

higher Hg levels than the eggs from the other northern Bering and Chukchi sea nesting locations 

(Fig. 6). We hypothesized that the higher Norton Sound values might be the result of the Yukon 

River outflow and the inputs from some of the smaller rivers draining the south side of the 

Seward Peninsula, and/or the historical placer gold mining activities that occurred along these 

smaller drainages and the northern shores of this coastal embayment. 

The geographic patterns in the murres eggs collected for this study corroborated the findings of 

Day et al. (2006) and Day et al. (in prep.). Eggs from St. Lazaria Island in the Gulf of Alaska 

and Cape Denbigh, Bluff, and Sledge Island in Norton Sound had the highest Hg levels, and eggs 

from the southern Bering Sea and northern Bering and Chukchi sea colonies had the lowest 

levels (Fig. 6). Mean Hg values in the 2005 Cape Denbigh, Bluff, and Sledge Island eggs were 

185 ng g-1, 163 ng g-1, and 122 ng g-1, respectively. Eggs collected from these same nesting 

locations in 2008-2009 had only slightly lower levels (132 ng g-1, 123 ng g-1, and 75 ng g-1, 

40 
respectively), and they displayed the same progressively declining east-to-west trends in values 

(Fig. 13). Correlations between Hg and δ15N levels were significant across all regions, indicating 

that trophic positions were influencing the geographic pattern. Eggs from the southern Bering 

Sea not only had the lowest Hg levels, but they also had the lowest δ15N values (Figs. 6 and 7). 

This was consistent with information suggesting murres tend to feed more heavily on 

invertebrates in this area (Coyle et al. 1992), and this was also supported by the relatively 

depleted δ13C levels, which indicated the presence of more benthic sources of carbon near the 

insular colonies. This same trophic information might also explain the higher Hg levels in the 

Norton Sound eggs, which also had the highest δ15N values (Fig. 7 and Appendix 3). However, 

Schell et al. (1998) reported a geographic gradient in baseline zooplankton δ15N levels ranging 

from 5.8 ‰ in the southern Bering Sea to 10.5 ‰ in the Chukchi Sea. We cannot quantitatively 

adjust the Norton Sound δ15N values because there are no corresponding zooplankton data 

currently available from this region. However, some evidence suggests that the elevated δ15N 

levels in Norton Sound may be caused by different baseline nitrogen sources, which may in turn 

mean the elevated Hg values are not entirely a function of the trophic level. This possibility is 

supported by the fact that the nearby colonies in the northern Bering and Chukchi seas also have 

higher δ15N values and lower Hg levels, relative to the Gulf of Alaska (Figs. 6 and 7). 

Furthermore, the Norton Sound eggs also contained the highest δ15N values (Fig. 7), indicating 

that there was an ecosystem-wide elevation in δ15N levels. This broad-scale regional information 

lends additional confidence to our conclusion that Hg values are higher in Norton Sound than in 

the nearby northern Bering and Chukchi sea regions. 

The murre egg δ13C signatures also displayed distinct regional trends (Fig. 8). As mentioned 

above, samples from the southern Bering Sea colonies had surprisingly depleted δ13C levels, 

given their proximity to the Bering Shelf break (Fig. 8 and Appendix 3; also see Fig. 1 in 

Springer and Roseneau 1985). These low values are probably related to the amounts and types of 

invertebrates taken by murres nesting at these locations. The highest δ13C sig natures were found 

in the St. Lazaria Island eggs in southeastern Alaska, where the dominant oceanographic features 

are the Alaska Current and a narrow band of continental shelf that only extends about 20 km 

offshore (e.g., see Mundy et al. 2010). The northern Bering and Chukchi sea murre eggs had 

intermediate δ13C values (Fig. 8 and Appendix 3). Colonies in these regions are exposed to 

Anadyr Current waters, which are cold, saline, and nutrient rich (e.g., see Springer et al. 1987, 

Woodgate et al. 1995, Schell et al. 1998), and Alaska Coastal Current waters, which are 

relatively warm, fresh, and poor in nutrients (e.g., see Coachman et al. 1975, Springer et al. 

1987, Elphick and Hunt 1993). In contrast, Norton Sound receives more direct carbon inputs 

from the Yukon River and some of the smaller drainages within the embayment (Zou et al. 

2006). In summary, the combined δ13C, δ15N, and Hg data provide strong evidence that Norton 

Sound has a unique Hg regime, and this information helped us select which colonies to check for 

Hg isotopes and explore the mechanisms behind these patterns. 

Hg Isotopes 

NPRB Project 822 was designed to improve understanding of the distribution of Hg 

contamination in Norton Sound and the environmental factors that might be contributing to the 

41 
elevated levels of this potentially harmful pollutant that was found in the region’s murre eggs 

during a previous study (Roseneau et al. 2008). 

Based on the Hg levels and stable carbon and nitrogen isotope signatures, it was evident that 

Norton Sound differed oceanographically from other regions in the study area (i.e., the northern 

Bering and Chukchi seas). We analyzed the murre eggs from the seven representative colonies 

for stable Hg isotopes to find out if Hg fractionation patterns could be used to help identify 

unique Hg signatures in the study area (Table 4 and Appendix 4). Given the potential that 

historical and current gold mining activities and outflows from the Yukon River and some of the 

smaller drainages might have influenced isotope levels in the Norton Sound, we chose eggs from 

nesting locations that would give us gradients running westward and northward from the eastern 

end of the sound into the northern Bering Sea and Bering Strait area. The colonies included Cape 

Denbigh at Norton Sound’s eastern end; Bluff at its mid-point along its northern shore; Sledge 

Island near its northwestern entrance, where the Yukon River outflow becomes entrained in the 

northward flowing Alaska Coastal Current (e.g., see Springer et al. 1984, Roseneau et al. 2000; 

Little Diomede Island, where the waters from Norton Sound become diluted by the Alaska 

Coastal Current and pass through Bering Strait (e.g., see Coachman et al. 1975); and St. 

Lawrence Island, which is at the same latitude as Norton Sound, but lies about 200 km offshore 

near the more oceanic, nutrient-rich waters of the Anadyr Current (Schell et al. 1998). We also 

included murre eggs from St. George Island in the southeastern Bering Sea and St. Lazaria Island 

in the southeastern Gulf of Alaska in the Hg isotope analyses to increase geographic coverage 

(Figs. 1 and 3). 

The magnitude and pattern of δ202Hg and Δ199Hg that we found at these colonies was similar to 

recently published information on eggs obtained at St. Lazaria, St. George, and St. Lawrence 

island in 1999-2002 (Point et al. 2011). This was encouraging, because it demonstrated that the 

Hg isotope patterns reflected the general conditions found in these marine environments 

annually. Point et al. (2011) reported that δ202Hg increased with trophic level at these and other 

colonies. Other author also reported that δ202Hg was positively correlated with trophic level or 

δ15N, and suggested that there may be physiological preferences for the assimilation or excretion 

of Hg isotopes by mass (e.g., see Bergquist and Blum 2007, Laffont et al. 2009, Perrot et al. 

2010). Based on this information, it appears that the heavier Hg isotopes like δ202Hg may become 

enriched in nitrogen, making them useful for tracing the flow of Hg through food webs. We did 

not find this correlation in the 2008-2009 data set, but when we included the 1999-2002 

information from the three previously studied nesting locations, we found a significant difference 

between δ202Hg and δ15N (P = 0.003), which confirmed earlier findings. We also discovered a 

significant negative relationship between δ202Hg and δ15N (P = 0.002) at the Norton Sound 

colonies, which are closely associated with coastal regimes. This negative relationship may be 

the result of geographically variable sources of MDF that are stronger than, and contrary to, 

trophic-related fractionations. 

MDF can be induced by photoreduction of Hg+2 or MeHg, microbial reduction of Hg+2, or 

microbial degradation of MeHg (e.g., see Bergquist and Blum 2007, Kritee et al. 2007, Yang and 

Sturgeon 2009). Gradients in water chemistry parameters such as dissolved organic carbon and 

nitrogen, salinity, temperature, turbidity, and irradiance are likely candidates that may also 

contribute to in-situ differences in MDF fractionation among areas. If in-situ fractionation was 

42 
involved in the negative relationship between δ202Hg and δ15N in coastal Norton Sound, the exvivo and in-vivo MDF processes may prove to be equally important considerations when using 

birds or fish for biomonitoring purposes. Although it is possible to generalize about the processes 

that the δ202Hg signatures might actually represent, the real value of these data may simply be the 

knowledge of their directions and magnitudes in varying circumstances. 

Δ199Hg followed a similar pattern, but it displayed an even more distinctive geographic gradient, 

with low values deep in Norton Sound at Cape Denbigh that became progressively higher as one 

moved westward toward the more oceanic waters of the northern Bering Sea (Fig. 12). Δ199H 

was also negatively correlated to δ15N, which was contrary to evidence in the literature indicating 

that MIF is not altered by trophic processes (e.g., see Bergquist and Blum 2007, Laffont et al. 

2009, Perrot et al. 2010, Point et al. 2011). This suggests that the negative correlations between 

δ15N and δ202Hg and Δ199Hg are circumstantial and that covariates instead of trophic factors are 

more likely to be the causative factors. As mentioned above, there are many processes known to 

induce Hg MDF (e.g., see Bergquist and Blum 2007, Kritee et al. 2007, Yang and Sturgeon 

2009), or cause other inorganic reactions, including changes in state, valency, complexity, and 

covalent bonding, which may also be enhanced by organic interactions (Ridley and Stetson 

2006). However a combination of laboratory and field observations indicate photoreduction is 

most likely to be the primary mechanism responsible for MIF in aquatic and atmospheric 

reservoirs (e.g., see Bergquist and Blum 2007, Carignan et al. 2009, Laffont et al. 2009, Senn et 

al. 2010, Point et al. 2011). If covariates related to differences in water chemistry are considered 

(e.g., turbidity, dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen, salinity, temperature, irradiance), turbidity 

appears to stand out as the only factor that could contribute to the trend we found in Norton 

Sound. Turbid coastal waters in this shallow embayment could inhibit light penetration, and 

therefore photoreduction-mediated MIF. This situation has been documented in the Gulf of 

Mexico (Senn et al. 2010). Samples of coastal fish caught in waters influenced by the 

Mississippi River plume were compared to samples from offshore species and both Δ199Hg and 

δ202Hg were significantly lower in the coastal fish. The lower Δ199Hg and δ202Hg levels were 

thought to have resulted from offshore sources of MeHg becoming methylated in oceanic waters 

that had undergone more extensive photochemical degradation because of better water clarity 

and light penetration before becoming part of the oceanic food web. 

The Gulf of Mexico scenario might explain the Δ199Hg and δ202Hg levels that we found in 

Norton Sound, but other factors might also be involved. Although turbidity could certainly affect 

the degree of light penetration and photoreduction in this embayment, the amount of irradiance 

reaching its surface waters would be just as important. Point et al. (2011) reported lower MIF in 

murre eggs from northern Bering and Chukchi sea colonies, compared to eggs from southern 

Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska colonies. These authors attributed the lower MIF in the northern 

eggs to the presence of seasonal sea-ice at these nesting locations, where birds typically arrive 

well before local ice cover dissipates and forage in open leads for several weeks before laying 

eggs. The ice cover serves as an effective barrier to sunlight and prevents photoreduction and 

ocean-atmosphere processes. We also discovered significantly lower MIF in the Norton Sound 

and northern Bering Sea murre eggs than in the eggs from the southern Bering Sea and Gulf of 

Alaska colonies. Although this large scale pattern conforms to the Point et al. (2011) sea-ice 

hypothesis, the Δ199Hg patterns at the northern nesting locations did not. Ice cover typically 

breaks up and dissipates in Norton Sound before it does at either St. Lawrence or Little Diomede 

43 
islands (Grebmeier et al. 2006 and Zhou et al. 2007). Given this information, it appears that ice 

cover alone cannot explain the lower MIF in the Norton Sound and northern Bering Sea murre 

eggs. 

Dissolved organic carbon (DOC) is another factor influencing photoreduction that appears to 

conflict with the Δ199Hg patterns that we found at the northern murre colonies. Considerable 

evidence is available suggesting that DOC levels should be higher in Norton Sound than in more 

offshore areas influenced by oceanic waters. Water samples taken along a southeastern Bering 

Sea transect showed that DOC and salinity had an inverse relationship and that values were 

higher in inner shelf waters than in outer shelf waters (Guo et al. 2004). Several studies support 

the possibility that Norton Sound DOC is derived from fluvial sources, because arctic rivers 

typically flush humic substances from the peat and soil deposits they drain (Fernandes and Sicre 

2000). In the Yukon River, levels of total organic carbon (TOC) peak during spring snowmelt 

(Zou et al. 2006) and total annual export flux is about 2 x 1012 g (Guo and Macdonald 2006). As 

a consequence, it is not surprising that most organic carbon (OC) found in the coastal sediments 

is derived from fluvial organic matter. Sediment studies in several of Alaska’s major river basins 

and oceanic environments have shown that Norton Sound’s total n-alkane levels are higher than 

they are in the southeastern Bering Sea, the Navarin Basin, the Gulf of Alaska, and Cook Inlet, 

suggesting that this coastal embayment receives consistently higher OC inputs than other parts of 

the study area (Venkatesan and Kaplan 1982; n-alkanes are strongly correlated with OC). Also, 

organic materials containing MeHg and Hg facilitate Hg MIF reactions induced by 

photoreduction in aquatic systems, and laboratory experiments have demonstrated that when Hg 

and MeHg are incubated at higher DOC levels, they exhibit higher MIF (Berquist and Blum 

2007). Given this information, if organic-mediated photoreduction really was the key driver 

behind the Norton Sound Δ199Hg values, the higher DOC in this embayment should have 

enhanced MIF, instead of suppressing it relative to the offshore colonies. 

The authors of most recent studies have focused on process-related causes like the ones 

mentioned above when attempting to explain fractionation patterns in the environment. 

However, they rarely discuss the potential influences of different source signatures unless they 

were able to identify discrete Hg point sources. This seems remiss, because Hg isotope data can 

help identify contaminant sources and this information can play important roles in management 

and remediation planning and decision making. As stated above, the 2008-2009 analyses 

identified an increasing east-west trend in δ202Hg and Δ199Hg, with the lowest values at Norton 

Sound’s eastern end and the highest values in the northern Bering Sea (Fig. 12). These analyses 

also revealed that δ13C was positively correlated with δ202Hg and Δ199Hg, which implied that a 

terrestrial carbon source was probably present in Norton Sound where the MDF and MIF were 

the lowest. These data helped confirm that the outflows from the Yukon River and some of the 

embayment’s smaller drainages dominate its water chemistry. The Yukon River alone 

contributes about 8 % of the total freshwater entering the Arctic Ocean (Aagaard and Carmack 

1989), and it is also the source of about 50 % of Norton Sound’s sediments (Atlas et al. 1983). 

The annual discharge from this major drainage also contains about 4400 kg of total Hg and 16 kg 

of MeHg (Schuster et al. 2010), and more than 40 ng/L of these contaminants have been found in 

water samples taken at its highest flow rates, which is 3 times higher than the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) aquatic life Hg standard for adverse chronic effects to biota. Four other 

northern rivers were 5 % to 31 % lower, indicating that the Yukon is clearly the largest single 

44 
point source of Hg in the region and should be recognized as the major source of this 

contaminant in western Alaska’s marine environments. This information, combined with data on 

currents and the east-west gradient in Norton Sound’s Hg values show that coastal systems can 

be important sources of MeHg in marine environments. 

However, it should be noted that cinnabar deposits on the southern Seward Peninsula help 

elevate Hg levels in nearshore sediments near the Norton Sound murre colonies (Nelson et al. 

1975). Also, historical gold mining operations that used large quantities of Hg were located in 

many of the smaller drainages flowing into the sound near these nesting locations and these 

activities are likely to have contributed in some measure to the elevated sediment levels found in 

the coastal zone between Sledge Island and Cape Denbigh (e.g., the Daniels Creek drainage near 

Bluff was heavily mined after its discovery in 1905—see Harrison 1905; old corroding 45 kg 

iron flasks of liquid mercury were still present in this area in 1968-1971—D.G. Roseneau, pers. 

obs.). When this information is combined with data on δ13C and Hg and MeHg levels in the 

Yukon River outflow, it provides compelling evidence that terrestrial sources are responsible for 

Norton Sound’s elevated Hg values and for the east-to-west gradient that we found in this coastal 

embayment. 

The fact that the δ202Hg and Δ199Hg levels also followed this same declining east-to-west trend 

strongly suggests that the gradient really represents a progression between terrestrial and marine 

Hg isotope signatures. We would expect the oceanic and atmospheric reservoirs of Hg to be 

well-mixed, and “old” in the sense that they would have had plenty of time for various forms of 

Hg reactivity to have taken place (see above). In aquatic biota, fractionation typically has a 

“heavy” isotope signature—i.e., positive δ202Hg—particularly in marine species (e.g., see Senn et 

al. 2010, Point et al. 2011). Lake and coastal studies have reported mixtures of positive and 

negative δ202Hg (Bergquist and Blum 2007, Laffont et al. 2009, Perrot et al. 2010). In contrast, 

Δ199Hg signatures in aquatic systems have almost invariably been positive anomalies (e.g., see 

Bergquist and Blum 2007, Laffont et al. 2009, Perrot et al. 2010, Senn et al. 2010, Point et al. 

2011), and atmospheric Hg contains the complementary negative Δ199Hg (Carignan et al. 2009) 

that presumably functions as the opposing end member in ocean-atmosphere exchanges. Hg 

isotope patterns in terrestrial geological samples differ from the mobile, reactive Hg patterns 

characteristic of aquatic and atmospheric reservoirs. Cinnabar and other ores, rocks, and 

geothermal deposits characteristically display negative δ202Hg signatures ranging as low as -4 ‰ 

(e.g., see Hintelmann and Lu 2003, Smith et al. 2005, Smith et al. 2008). Most sediments and 

coals also have negative δ202Hg signatures and negative to slightly positive Δ199Hg signatures 

(Foucher and Hintelmann 2006, and Biswas et al. 2008). 

The characteristically negative delta values that are normally found in many terrestrial geological 

samples support our contention that the higher Hg levels and lower δ202Hg and Δ199Hg values in 

the Norton Sound murres eggs are produced by terrestrial sources of Hg. We believe that erosion 

in the Yukon River drainage and some of the smaller river systems entering the sound supply 

newly mobilized Hg to the embayment’s water column and sediments. When this terrestrially 

derived Hg enters the marine environment, it is in a reactive state and becomes available for 

fractionation. Norton Sound waters eventually mix with Alaska Coastal Current waters and are 

advected northward into Bering Strait, where the high Hg and low fractionation source signatures 

become diluted and mix with the lower Hg and more highly fractionated oceanic Hg reservoirs. 

45 
Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) 

General Results 

Organochlorine contaminant levels in the murre and gull eggs were similar to the values we 

found during our previous study (i.e., NPRB Project 534; see Roseneau et al. 2008). The Kukpuk 

River delta glaucous gull eggs had the highest contaminant levels, except for pentachlorobenzene 

and octachlorostyrene, which were higher in the Norton Sound gull eggs (Table 6). BDE 47 in 

the Kukpuk eggs was an order of a magnitude higher than in the Shishmaref Inlet eggs, the next 

most contaminated colony. This information suggests that monitoring flame retardants in gull 

eggs from colonies north of Bering Strait has the potential to provide valuable data on the 

distribution and temporal changes in this compound in this region of the state. 

Regional Comparisons 

Organic contaminant levels in common murre eggs tended to be higher in Norton Sound than in 

the other sectors of our study area, based on significant differences in HCB, octachlorosytrene, 

cis-nonachlor, mirex, and BDE 47 values (Fig. 16). In contrast, the Norton Sound gull eggs 

contained lower levels of organic contaminants than eggs from locations outside this coastal 

embayment (only 4,4’-DDE, octachlorostyrene, and pentachlorobenzene did not differ 

significantly). However, these apparent differences may be more complex than the data suggest. 

δ15N values were significantly higher in the Norton Sound gull and murre eggs than in the eggs 

from other regions (Fig. 7), which suggest the Norton Sound birds are foraging at higher trophic 

levels that were exposing them to higher levels of contaminants. δ13C values, which normally 

suggest near-shore versus off-shore foraging strategies, also confuse the picture because they did 

not differ significantly between the taxa (Fig. 8). 

Correlations between stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes and organochlorine contaminants are 

shown in Table 7. Because we expected contaminant levels to increase with trophic level (as 

indicated by δ15N), we were surprised by the significantly negative correlations between 

pentachlorobenzene in the glaucous gull eggs and heptachlor epoxide in the Bering Sea common 

murre eggs. However, negative correlations have also been found in thick-billed murre eggs 

(Vander Pol et al. 2011). Possible explanations for these findings include decoupling between 

δ15N and δ13C and the contaminant data sets, given the fact that the isotope data represented 

protein fractions of the diets and the contaminant information was based on lipid fractions. If the 

birds obtained most of their lipids, and hence most of their contaminant loads, from the same 

prey types they acquired protein from, then close coupling between δ15N and the contaminants 

that accumulate at the various trophic levels would be one of the expected outcomes. However, 

these kinds of couplings are not always present, and if the lipid components of the eggs are 

primarily derived from body stores obtained from lower trophic level prey, and the protein 

components are derived from higher trophic level prey (or vice versa), then negative correlations 

would be the expected outcome. Before we can interpret these data correctly, we need more 

information on nutrient allocation strategies and their effects on contaminant burdens. 

46 
We conducted a second PCA that combined the Hg and δ15N and δ13C values (Fig. 19). The 

Bering and Chukchi sea murre and gull eggs still tended to separate, but the gull eggs did not 

cluster together as well as they did before (Fig. 17). However, lower proportions of Hg and δ13C 

carbon stable isotopes helped separate the Norton Sound and Bering – Chukchi Sea samples (see 

the Hg section above). 

Species Comparisons 

A previous study reported that common and thick-billed murre eggs from the same colonies 

contained different organochlorine contaminant levels (Vander Pol et al. 2004). However, the 

only differences we found in the 2008-2009 samples were in the heptachlor epoxide, 

pentachlorobenzene, and β-HCH values in the St. George Island eggs (these eggs were collected 

in different years; thick-bills in 2008 and commons in 2009; see Appendix 2). 

Pentachlorobenzene levels in the 2008 and 2009 Shaktoolik glaucous gull eggs were also 

different (MANOVA F1,7 = 18.7, P < 0.0034). 

47 
Table 7. Correlations between major contaminants (on a lipid mass basis) and carbon and nitrogen isotope rat

murre (COMU) and glaucous gull (GLGU) eggs collected in 2008-2009. Significant correlations (P < 0.05) are s

All Data n=117 All COMUs n=30 Norton Sound COMUs n=15 Bering Sea COMUs n=10 All GLGUs n=52 Norton Sound GLGUs n=3

Pairwise Correlations r 2 P r 2 P r 2 P r 2 P r 2 P r 2 P 

δ13C-δ15N 0.1429 0.1243 -0.2453 0.1914 0.2751 0.321 0.8534 0.0017 0.7254 <.0001 0.6972 <.0001 

BDE 47-δ15N 0.0067 0.9426 -0.1362 0.473 0.1559 0.5791 -0.0076 0.9834 -0.0869 0.5402 0.0986 0.5616 

∑16PCBs-δ15N 0.1275 0.1708 -0.0343 0.8572 0.5143 0.0498 0.4168 0.2308 -0.1823 0.1959 0.0774 0.6488 

4,4'-DDE-δ15N -0.0223 0.811 -0.2275 0.2267 0.2436 0.3816 0.168 0.6426 -0.2636 0.059 -0.1856 0.2714 

β-HCH-δ15N 0.1269 0.1726 0.1256 0.5084 0.1895 0.4989 -0.5563 0.0949 -0.2563 0.0666 0.0847 0.6183 HCB-δ15N 0.3613 <.0001 0.5683 0.0011 0.2567 0.3557 0.1949 0.5895 -0.0458 0.7471 0.3409 0.0389 

Pentachlorobenzene-δ15N -0.0863 0.3549 -0.1625 0.3908 -0.3016 0.2746 -0.3448 0.3292 -0.3856 0.0048 -0.3923 0.0163 

Cis-nonachlor-δ15N 0.2215 0.0164 0.2458 0.1905 0.1851 0.509 -0.4358 0.208 -0.1062 0.4537 0.0826 0.6268 

Heptachlor epoxide-δ15N 0.164 0.0772 0.2067 0.273 0.1328 0.6371 -0.6692 0.0343 -0.218 0.1206 0.0461 0.7863 

Mirex-δ15N 0.1657 0.0743 0.6145 0.0003 0.7139 0.0028 -0.189 0.601 -0.1656 0.2407 0.0609 0.7202 Oxychlordane-δ15N 0.1125 0.2273 0.2289 0.2237 0.3032 0.272 0.2834 0.4276 -0.2076 0.1397 0.0025 0.9882 

Octachlorosytrene-δ15N 0.3563 <.0001 0.5388 0.0021 0.3441 0.2091 0.4188 0.2284 0.1467 0.2993 0.336 0.042 

BDE 47-δ13C 0.1007 0.2801 0.3081 0.0977 0.3698 0.1749 -0.4266 0.2189 0.2325 0.0973 -0.1474 0.384 

∑16PCBs-δ13C -0.3228 0.0004 0.3716 0.0432 0.5521 0.0328 0.3508 0.3204 -0.1442 0.3077 -0.228 0.1747 4,4'-DDE-δ13C -0.3605 <.0001 0.4921 0.0057 0.6039 0.0171 0.0767 0.8332 -0.3273 0.0179 -0.4111 0.0115 

β-HCH-δ13C -0.3451 0.0001 -0.3712 0.0435 0.0679 0.81 -0.7166 0.0197 -0.1814 0.1982 -0.1892 0.2622 

HCB-δ13C -0.2826 0.002 -0.3356 0.0698 0.1519 0.5888 0.0526 0.8853 -0.0717 0.6134 0.0105 0.9509 

Pentachlorobenzene-δ13C -0.5481 <.0001 -0.6208 0.0003 -0.7024 0.0035 -0.6248 0.0535 -0.5766 <.0001 -0.7294 <.0001 

Cis-nonachlor-δ13C -0.2208 0.0168 0.0026 0.989 0.1075 0.703 -0.6072 0.0626 0.0191 0.8932 -0.0707 0.6777 

Heptachlor epoxide-δ13C -0.4381 <.0001 -0.115 0.5452 0.1587 0.5722 -0.6459 0.0437 -0.3063 0.0272 -0.369 0.0246 

Mirex-δ13C -0.3788 <.0001 -0.057 0.7647 0.3446 0.2085 -0.0362 0.921 -0.2159 0.1243 -0.27 0.106 

Oxychlordane-δ13C -0.3634 <.0001 0.2679 0.1524 0.4213 0.1178 0.3717 0.2902 -0.1645 0.2438 -0.425 0.0087 Octachlorosytrene-δ13C -0.0743 0.426 -0.2056 0.2758 0.2794 0.3132 0.3454 0.3283 -0.1171 0.4085 0.018 0.9158 

48 
Temporal Comparisons 

The 2008 St. Lazaria Island common murre eggs showed a slight increase in 4,4’-DDE, Σ8PCBs, 

and HCB levels, compared to previous values (Vander Pol et al. 2004). Because this colony is 

one of STAMP’s annual long-term monitoring sites, we will continue collecting data on the 

status of these contaminants at this location in upcoming years. 

We did not expect to find increased levels of mirex in the 2008 St. George Island thick-billed 

murre eggs (Fig. 18) because this pesticide is a legacy compound that was banned by the 

Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants in May 2004 (http://chm.pops.int/). The 

increase indicates there is a lag in the system that may persist for some time. An increase in this 

contaminant was also found in the Bogoslof Island 2000-2005 common murre eggs (Vander Pol 

2007). Given the combined information from these sampling sites, we believe this pesticide 

should be monitored in the southern Bering Sea for several more years. Because St. George 

Island is another one of STAMP’s long-term monitoring sites, we will also continue to collect 

data on this contaminant at this location in future years. It is worth noting that an exemption from 

the 2004 Stockholm Convention allows China to produce 10-30 tons of this compound annually 

to help control termites. Also, because Russia and the United States (USA) did not sign the 

treaty, information is not available from these countries. However, the EPA banned the use of 

this pesticide in the US in 1978 (http://www.epa.gov/pbt/pubs/mirex.htm). The mirex trend was 

similar to that for mercury (Fig. 18) collaborating the possible Asian influence to this region of 

the Southern Bering Sea. 

In 1999-2002, organic contaminant levels differed between the St. Lazaria and St. George island 

murre colonies (see Fig. 6 in Roseneau et al. 2008), but in 2008, these differences were much 

smaller (Fig.18). This change over the years may explain in part some of the overlap we found 

between the St. Lawrence Island murre and Stuart Island gull eggs. Although the first PC still 

tended to separate most of the Bering and Chukchi sea glaucous gull eggs from the murre eggs 

(Fig. 17), the separation between this region and the Gulf of Alaska was not as distinct as it was 

during our earlier study when it was complete (see Figs. 8 and 10 in Roseneau et al. 2008; also 

see Vander Pol 2007). 

49 
 

-HCH, HCB, 0.3 

heptachlor epxoide, 

PCB 28&31 PC 2 - 21.8 % of total variation 

0.2 

0.1 

0.0 

-0.1 

-0.2 

St. Lazaria I. COMU 2008 

St. Lazaria I. TBMU 2009 

Aiktak I. GWGU 2009 

St. George I. COMU 2009 

St. George I. TBMU 2008 

St. Paul I. TBMU 2009 

St. Lawrence I. COMU 2008 

St. Lawrence I. TBMU 2008 

Sinuk R. delta GLGU 2009 

Sledge I. COMU 2008 

Safety Sound GLGU 2008 

Bluff COMU 2008 

Bluff GLGU 2008 

Hg, 

13C -0.3 

-HCH, HCB, 0.3 Carolyn I. GLGU 2008 heptachlor epxoide, 

PCB 28&31 Cape Darby GLGU 2008 PC 2 - 21.8 % of total variation 

Cape Denbigh COMU 2009 

Shaktoolik GLGU 2008 

Shaktoolik GLGU 2009 

Stuart I. GLGU 2009 

Little Diomede I. TBMU 2008 

0.2 

0.1 Brevig Mission GLGU 2009 

Shishmaref Inlet GLGU 2008 

Kukpuk R. delta GLGU 2008 

0.0 Cape Lisburne UNMU 2009 

-0.1 

Hg, 

13C -0.2 

-0.10 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 13 15  N, Octachlorostyrene, HCB 6-Cl- & 7-Cl-PCBs, Oxychlordane,  C

PC 1 - 42.4 % of total variation 

Figure 19. Principal components analyses (means and standard errors) for organic compounds, 

mercury (Hg), and stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes in common murre (COMU), thick-billed 

murre (TBMU), glaucous gull (GLGU), and glaucous-winged gull (GWGU) eggs collected at 19 

Alaskan colonies in 2008-2009. Compounds contributing to the loadings are shown along the 

axes (individual samples at top and colony means at bottom). 

50 
Conclusions 

Mercury (Hg) and Hg, Carbon (C), and Nitrogen (N) Isotopes 

1.	 Hg levels in murre eggs were consistently higher in Norton Sound, compared to the 

Bering and Chukchi seas. 

2.	 Combined Hg and δ13C and δ15N data indicate Norton Sound has a unique mercury 

regime and that the highest levels of this contaminant are found at its eastern end and 

along its northern shores between Cape Denbigh and the Sledge Island vicinity. 

3.	 Combined δ13C, δ202Hg, and Δ199Hg data provide compelling evidence that terrestrial 

sources of Hg are responsible for the elevated levels in Norton Sound and for the 

declining east-to-west gradient in this coastal embayment. 

4.	 The Yukon River is the largest single point source of Hg in the Norton Sound region and 

should be recognized as the major source of this contaminant in western northwestern 

Alaska’s marine environments. 

5.	 Differences between common and thick-billed murre Hg levels were relatively small in 

relation to the geographic trends across the study area indicating that either species can be 

used to determine regional patterns of this contaminant. 

6.	 Hg, δ13C, and δ15N isotope patterns did not differ significantly among common and thickbilled murre eggs collected from the same nesting locations. 

7.	 Gull egg Hg levels varied among the Norton Sound colonies, but were not unique to the 

study area. 

8.	 Overall, gull eggs contained higher levels of Hg and δ15N, and lower levels of δ13C, 

compared to murre eggs, indicating that the differences in Hg contamination between 

these taxa were probably the result of differences in foraging behavior. 

9.	 Norton Sound murre and gull eggs contained higher levels of δ15N, compared to other 

regions, and this difference may have been caused by the Norton Sound birds feeding at 

higher trophic levels, or by an ecosystem-wide higher δ15N baseline level. 

10. Norton Sound murre eggs had significantly lower δ13C levels relative to the northern 

Bering and Chukchi seas, indicating that the carbon sources in this embayment are 

probably terrestrial in origin. 

11. Norton Sound murre eggs had significantly lower δ202Hg and Δ199Hg levels relative to the 

northern Bering and Chukchi seas, indicating lower levels of mass dependent and mass 

independent fractionation that may have resulted from: 

a. Suppression of fractionation processes because of increased turbidity; or 

51 
b.	 Inputs of terrestrially derived Hg from geological sources, which are typically 

characterized by low or negative fractionation; or 

c.	 Both of these factors. 

12. Sea-ice cover alone cannot explain the lower MIF found in the Norton Sound and 

northern Bering Sea murre eggs. 

13. Because trophic levels and habitat/prey selections appear to influence Hg patterns in taxa, 

δ15N and δ13C analyses should be included in long-term contaminants monitoring 

programs. 

Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) 

1.	 The geographic organic contaminant patterns found in the Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska 

during NPRB Project 534 are still present, but they may be weakening. 

2. There are clear differences in organic contaminant levels between murre and gull eggs. 

3.	 Organic contaminant levels appear to be stable or decreasing, with the exception of mirex 

at St. George Island, where it has increased in thick-billed murre eggs since 2002. 

4.	 The increase in mirex at St. George Island, coupled with a similar increase previously 

documented in Bogoslof Island common murre eggs, indicates this pesticide should be 

monitored in the southern Bering Sea for several more years. 

5.	 The variable POP and Hg levels found in the gull eggs clearly reflect differences in prey 

availability among sampling locations and the opportunistic feeding habits of these birds 

indicating they are not good candidates for contaminants monitoring programs. 

6.	 Monitoring POPs in Bering and Chukchi seas and Gulf of Alaska murre eggs can help 

identify a variety of physical and chemical factors that may be affecting these 

environments in different ways. 

Recommendations 

1.	 There is a need to clarify what effects the Yukon River sediments and suspended particulates 

entering Norton Sound have on the embayment’s Hg isotope signatures. 

2.	 There is a need to measure δ15N and δ13C isotope levels in Norton Sound zooplankton so that 

quantitative corrections can be made across regions and Hg loading can be compared among 

sampling sites more accurately. 

52 
 

 

 

 

 

Literature Cited 

Aagaard, K. and E.C. Carmack. 1989. The role of sea ice and other fresh water in the Arctic 

circulation. Journal of Geophysical Research 94:14485-14498. 

Ahmasuk, A. and E. Trigg. 2007. Bering Strait region local and traditional knowledge pilot project; a 

comprehensive subsistence use study of the Bering Strait region. North Pacific Research Board 

Project 643 Final Report, 303 pp. 

Ainley, D.G., D.N. Nettleship, H.R. Carter, and A.E. Storey. 2002. The Birds of North America, 

Academy of Natural Sciences and American Ornithologists' Union. 

AMAP. 1998. Scientific Experts Workshop, Girdwood, Alaska, April 1998. 

AMAP. 1999. Heavy metals in the Arctic Workshop. Anchorage, Alaska, September 1999. 

(AMAP report 99:8). 

Atlas, R.M., M.I. Venkatesan, I.R. Kaplan, R.A. Feely, R.P. Griffiths, and R.Y. Morita. 1983. 

Distribution of hydrocarbons and microbial populations related to sedimentation processes in 

lower Cook Inlet and Norton Sound, Alaska. Arctic 36:251-261. 

Atwell, L., K.A. Hobson and H.E. Welch. 1998. Biomagnification and bioaccumulation of 

mercury in an arctic marine food web: insights from stable nitrogen isotope analysis. Canadian 

Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55:1114-1121. 

Barrett, R.T., M. Asheim, and V. Bakken. 1997. Ecological relationships between two sympatric 

congeneric species, common murres and thick-billed murres, Uria aalge and U. lomvia. 

Canadian Journal of Zoology 75:618-631. 

Bergquist, B.A. and J.D. Blum. 2007. Mass-dependent and -independent fractionation of Hg 

isotopes by photoreduction in aquatic systems. Science 318:417-420. 

Biswas, A., J.D. Blum, B.A. Bergquist, G.J. Keeler, and Z. Xie. 2008. Natural mercury isotope 

variation in coal deposits and organic soils. Environmental Science and Technology 42:8303­

8309. 

Campbell, L.M., R.J. Norstrom, K.A. Hobson, D.C.G. Muir, S. Backus, and A.T. Fisk. 2005. 

Mercury and other trace elements in a pelagic Arctic marine food web (Northwater Polynya, 

Baffin Bay). Science of the Total Environment 351-352:247-263. 

Carignan, J., N. Estrade, J.E. Sonke, and O.F.X. Donard. 2009. Odd isotope deficits in 

atmospheric Hg measured in lichens. Environmental Science and Technology 43:5660-5664. 

53 
 

Chasar, L.C., B.C. Scudder, A.R. Stewart, A.H. Bell, and G.R. Aiken. 2009. Mercury cycling in 

stream ecosystems. 3. Trophic dynamics and methylmercury bioaccumulation. Environmental 

Science and Technology 43(8):2733-2739. 

Christopher, S.J., S.E. Long, M.S. Rearick, and J.D. Fassett. 2001. Development of isotope 

dilution cold vapor inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and its application to the 

certification of mercury in NIST standard reference materials. Analytical Chemistry 

73(10):2190-2199. 

Chumchal, M.M. and K.D. Hambright. 2009. Ecological factors regulating mercury 

contamination of fish from Caddo Lake, Texas, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 

28(5):962-972. 

Coachman, L.K., Aagaard, K, and Tripp, R.B. 1975. Bering Strait, the regional physical 

oceanography. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington. 172 pp. 

Coyle, K.O., G.L. Hunt, M.B. Decker, and T.J. Weingartner. 1992. Murre foraging, epibenthic 

sound scattering and tidal advection over a shoal near St. George Island, Bering Sea. Marine 

Ecology Progress Series 83:1-14. 

Davis, W.C., S.S. Vander Pol, R.S. Pugh, R.D. Day, and P.R. Becker. 2004. An accurate and 

sensitive method for the determination of methylmercury in biological specimens using GC-ICPMS with solid-phase microextraction. Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry 19:1546-1551. 

Day, R.D., S.S. Vander Pol, S.J. Christopher, W.C. Davis, R.S. Pugh, K.S. Simac, D.G. 

Roseneau, and P.R. Becker. 2006. Murre eggs (Uria aalge and Uria lomvia) as indicators of 

mercury contamination in the Alaskan marine environment. Environmental Science and 

Technology 40 (3): 659-665. 

Day, R.D., D.G. Roseneau, K.A. Hobson, O.F.X. Donard, S.S. Vander Pol, R.S. Pugh, A. Moors, 

and P.R. Becker. In prep. Regional, temporal, and species patterns of mercury in Alaskan seabird 

eggs: mercury sources and cycling or food web effects? (to be submitted to Environmental 

Pollution). 

Dietz, R., P.M. Outridge, and K.A. Hobson. 2009. Anthropogenic contributions to mercury 

levels in present-day arctic animals - a review. Science of the Total Environment 407(24):6120­

6131. 

Dragoo, D.E. 1991. Food habits and productivity of kittiwakes and murres at St. George Island, 

Alaska. University of Alaska – Fairbanks Master’s Thesis.104 pp. 

Dunton, K.H., T. Weingartner and E.C. Carmack. 2006. The nearshore western Beaufort Sea 

ecosystem: circulation and importance of terrestrial carbon in arctic coastal food webs. Progress 

in Oceanography 71:362-3778. 

54 
 

Elphick, C.S. and G.L. Hunt, Jr. 1993. Variations in the distribution of marine birds in water 

mass in the northern Bering Sea. Condor 95:33-44. 

Estrade, N., J. Carignan and O.F.X. Donard. 2011. Tracing and Quantifying Anthropogenic 

Mercury Sources in Soils of Northern France Using Isotopic Signatures. Environmental Science 

and Technology 45:1235-1242. 

Fernandes, M.B. and M.-A. Sicre. 2000. The importance of terrestrial organic carbon inputs on 

Kara Sea shelves as revealed by n-alkanes, OC and d13C values. Organic Geochemistry 31:363­

374. 

Feng, X., D. Foucher, H. Hintelmann, H. Yan, T. He, T. and G. Qiu. 2010. Tracing Mercury 

Contamination Sources in Sediments Using Mercury Isotope Compositions. Environmental 

Science and Technology 44:3363-3368. 

Fitzgerald, W.F., C.H. Lamborg, and C.R. Hammerschmidt. 2007. Marine Biogeochemical 

Cycling of Mercury. Chemical Reviews 107:641-662. 

Foucher, D. and H. Hintelmann. 2006. High-precision measurement of mercury isotope ratios in 

sediments using cold-vapor generation multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass 

spectrometry. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 384:1470-1478. 

Foucher, D., N. Ogrinc and Hintelmann H. 2009. Tracing Mercury Contamination from the Idrija 

Mining Region (Slovenia) to the Gulf of Trieste Using Hg Isotope Ratio Measurements. 

Environmental Science and Technology 43:33-39. 

Gantner, N., H. Hintelmann, W. Zheng and D.C.G. Muir. 2009. Variations in Stable Isotope 

Fractionation of Hg in Food Webs of Arctic Lakes. Environmental Science and Technology 

43:9148-9154. 

Gaston, A.J. and I.L. Jones. 1998. The Auks. In Bird Families of the World. New York, Oxford 

University Press. 

Gehrke, G.E., J.D. Blum and M. Marvin-DiPasquale. 2011. Sources of mercury to San Francisco 

Bay surface sediment as revealed by mercury stable isotopes. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 

75:691-705. 

Grebmeier, J.M., J.E. Overland, S.E. Moore, E.V. Farley, E.C. Carmack, L.W. Cooper, K.E. 

Frey, J.H. Helle, F.A. McLaughlin, and S.L. McNutt. 2006. A major ecosystem shift in the 

northern Bering Sea. Science 311:1446-1464. 

Guo, L. and R.W. Macdonald. 2006. Sources and transport of terrigenous organic matter in the 

upper Yukon River: evidence from isotope (13C, 14C and 15N) composition of dissolved, 

colloidal and particulate phases. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 20. 

55 
 

 

Guo, L., T. Tanaka, D. Wang, N. Tanaka, and A. Murata. 2004. Distributions, speciation and 

stable isotope composition of organic matter in the southeastern Bering Sea. Marine Chemistry 

91:211-226. 

Hintelmann, H. and S. Lu 2003. High precision isotope ratio measurements of mercury isotopes 

in cinnabar ores using multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Analyst 

128:635-639. 

Harrison, E.S. 1905. Nome and Seward Peninsula. The Metropolitan Press, Seattle, Washington. 

392 pp. 

Hobson, K.A., J.F. Piatt, and J. Pitocchelli. 1994. Using stable isotopes to determine seabird trophic 

relationships. Journal of Animal Ecology 63:786-798. 

Hobson, K.A., L.I. Wassenar, B. Mila, I. Lovette, C. Dingle, and T.B. Smith. 2002. Stable 

isotopes as indicators of altitudinal distributions and movements in an Ecuadorean hummingbird 

community. Oecologia 136:302-308. 

Jaegar, I., H. Hop and G.W. Gabrielson. 2009. Biomagnification of mercury in selected species 

from an Arctic marine food web in Svalbard. Science of the Total Environment 407:4744-4751. 

Jarman, W.M., K.A. Hobson, W.J. Sydeman, C.E. Bacon, and E.B. McLaren. 1996. Influence of 

trophic position and feeding location on contaminant levels in the Gulf of the Farallones food 

web revealed by stable isotope analysis. Environmental Science and Technology 30(2):654-660. 

Kritee, K., J.D. Blum, M.W. Johnson, B.A. Bergquist, and T. Barkay. 2007. Mercury stable 

isotope fractionation during reduction of Hg(II) to Hg(0) by mercury resistant microorganisms. 

Environmental Science and Technology 41:1889-1895. 

Laffont, L., J.E. Sonke, L. Maurice, H. Hintelmann, M. Pouilly, Y.S. Bacarreza, T. Perez, and P. 

Behra. 2009. Anomalous mercury isotopic compositions of fish and human hair in the Bolivian 

Amazon. Environmental Science and Technology 43:8985-8990. 

Liu, J., X. Feng, R. Yin, W. Zhu and Z. Li. 2011. Mercury distributions and mercury isotope 

signatures in sediments of Dongjiang, the Pearl River Delta, China. Chemical Geology 287:81­

89. 

Mundy, P.R., D.M. Allen, J.L. Bolt, N.A. Bond, S. Dressel, E.V. Farley Jr., D.H. Hanselman, J. 

Heifetz, R.R. Hopcroft, M.A. Janout, C. Ladd, R.C. Lam, P.A. Livingston, C.R. Lunsford, J.T. 

Mathis, F.J. Mueter, C.N. 

Murphy, E.C., A.M. Springer, and D.G. Roseneau. 1986. Population status of Uria aalge at a 

colony in western Alaska: results and simulations. Ibis 128: 348-363. 

Nelson, C.H., D.E. Pierce, K.W. Leong, and F.F.H. Wang. 1975. Mercury distribution in ancient 

and modern sediment of northeastern Bering Sea. Marine Geology 18:91-104. 

56 
 

Perrot, V., V.N. Epov, M.V. Pastukhov, V.I. Grebenshchikova, C. Zouiten, J.E. Sonke, S. 

Husted, O.F.X. Donard, and D. Amouroux. 2010. Tracing sources and bioaccumulation of 

mercury in fish of Lake Baikal - Angara River using Hg isotopic composition. Environmental 

Science and Technology 44:8030-8037. 

Point, D., J.E. Sonke, R.D. Day, D.G. Roseneau, K.A. Hobson, S.S. Vander Pol, A.J. Moors, 

R.S. Pugh, O.F.X. Donard, and P.R. Becker. 2011. Methylmercury photodegradation influenced 

by sea-ice cover in arctic marine ecosystems. Nature Geosciences 4:188-194. (Publ. online 

01/16/2011; DOI: 10.1038/NGE01049). 

Reed, R.K., 1968. Transport of the Alaskan Stream. Nature 220:681-682 

(doi:10.1038/220681a0). 

Ridley, W.I. and S.J. Stetson. 2006. A review of isotopic composition as an indicator of the 

natural and anthropogenic behavior of mercury. Applied Geochemistry 21:1889-1899. 

Rooper, N. Sarkar, S.A.K. Shotwell, M.V. Sturdevant, A.C. Thomas, T.J. Weingartner, and D. 

Woody. 2010. Status and trends of the Alaska Current Region, 2003-2008. Pp. 142-195 in S.M. 

McKinnell and M.J. Dagg (Eds.), Marine ecosystems of the North Pacific Ocean, 2003-2008. 

PICES Special Publication 4, 393 pp. 

Roseneau, D.G., M.F. Chance, P.F. Chance, and G.V. Byrd. 2000. Monitoring seabird 

populations in areas of oil and gas development on the Alaskan continental shelf: Cape Lisburne 

and Cape Thompson seabird studies, 1995-1997. Final rept. by the Alaska Maritime National 

Wildlife Refuge, Homer, Alaska to the U.S. Geological Survey Biological Resources Division, 

Western Regional Office, Seattle, Washington (USGS Study USGS/BRD/CR-1999-0002 and 

OCS Study 99-0011), 147 pp. 

Roseneau, D.G., P.R. Becker, S.S Vander Pol, R.D. Day, D. Point, K.S. Simac, A.J. Moors, M.B. 

Ellisor, R.S. Pugh, and G.S. York. 2008. Expanding the Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring 

Project (STAMP) in the North Pacific: Geographic patterns in contaminant residues in seabird 

eggs used in rural subsistence diets. North Pacific Research Board Project 534 Final Report, 145 

pp. 

Rust, L.B, R.S. Pugh, A.J. Moors, P.R. Becker, S.S. Vander Pol, and D.G. Roseneau. 2010. 

Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring Project: Protocol for collecting and banking seabird 

eggs. NISTIR 7678, Gaithersburg, MD. 50 pp. 

Schell, D.M., B.A. Barnett, and K.A. Vinette. 1998. Carbon and nitrogen isotope ratios in 

zooplankton of the Bering, Chukchi and Beaufort seas. Marine Ecology Progress Series 162:11­

23. 

Schuster, P.F., R. Streigel, M. Dornblaser, G. Aiken, D. Krabbenhoft, J. Dewild, and K. Butler. 

2010. Mercury export from the Yukon River Basin: a unique opportunity to assess global 

57 
 

 

atmospheric sources at large scales and potential future responses to climate change. American 

Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, CA. 

Senn, D.B., E.J. Chesney, J.D. Blum, M.S. Bank, A. Maage, and J.P. Shine. 2010. Stable isotope 

(N, C, Hg) study of methylmercury sources and trophic transfer in the Northern Gulf of Mexico. 

Environmental Science and Technology 44:1630-1637. 

Smith, C.N., S.E. Kesler, J.D. Blum, and J.J. Rytuba. 2008. Isotope geochemistry of mercury in 

source rocks, mineral deposits and spring deposits of the California Coast Ranges, USA. Earth 

and Planetary Science Letters 269:399-407. 

Smith, C.N., B. Klaue, S.E. Kesler, and J.D. Blum. 2005. Mercury isotope fractionation in fossil 

hydrothermal systems. Geology 33:825-828. 

Springer, A.M. and D.G. Roseneau. 1985. Copepod-based food webs: auklets and 

oceanography in the Bering Sea. Marine Ecol. Prog. Ser. 21: 229-237. 

Springer, A.M., D.G. Roseneau, E.C. Murphy, and M.I. Springer. 1984. Environmental controls 

of marine food webs: food habits of seabirds in the Eastern Chukchi Sea. Canadian Journal of 

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 41:1202-1215. 

Springer, A.M., D.G. Roseneau, D.S. Lloyd, C.P. McRoy, and E.C. Murphy .1986. Seabird 

responses to fluctuating prey availability in the eastern Bering Sea. Marine Ecology Progress 

Series 32:1-12. 

Springer, A.M., E.C. Murphy, D.G. Roseneau, C.P. McRoy, and B.A. Cooper. 1987. The 

paradox of pelagic food webs in the northern Bering Sea - I. Seabird food habits. Continental 

Shelf Research 7:895-911. 

Sonke, J.E., 2011. A global model of mass independent mercury stable isotope fractionation. 

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 75:4577-4590. 

Sowls, A.L., S.A. Hatch, and C.J. Lensink. 1978. Catalog of Alaskan seabird colonies. U.S. 

Fish Wildl. Serv., Biol. Serv. Prog. FWS/OBS 78/78, Anchorage, AK. 153 pp. 

Swartz, L.G. 1966. Sea-cliff birds. Pp. 611-678 in N.J. Wilimovsky and J.N. Wolfe (eds.), 

Environment of the Cape Thompson region, Alaska. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Div. of 

Tech. Information Extension, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 1,250pp. [Available as two paperback 

volumes (Books 1 and 2) from the Natl. Tech. Information Serv., Dept. of Comm., Springfield, 

Virginia 22161.] 

Vander Pol, S.S., Becker, P.R., Kucklick, J.R., Pugh, R.S., Roseneau, D.G., and Simac, K.S. 

2004. Persistent organic pollutants in Alaskan murre (Uria spp.) eggs: geographical, species, and 

temporal comparisons. Environmental Science and Technology 38:1305-1312. 

58 
 

 

Vander Pol, S.S. 2005. Preparation of toxaphene congener calibration solutions. NIST Report of 

Activities (ROA) 839.02-07-305, Gaithersburg, MD. 

Vander Pol, S.S. 2007. Determination of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), 

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and organochlorine pesticides in common murre (Uria aalge) 

eggs collected in 2003-2005 for the Seabird Tissue Archival and Monitoring Project (STAMP). 

NIST Report of Activities (ROA) 839.02-07-305, Gaithersburg, MD. 

Vander Pol, S.S., M.B. Ellisor, R.S. Pugh, P.R. Becker, D.L. Poster, M.M. Schantz, S.D. Leigh, 

B.J. Wakeford, D.G. Roseneau, and K.S. Simac. 2007. Development of a murre (Uria spp.) egg 

control material. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 387, 2357-2363. 

Vander Pol, S.S., P.R. Becker, M.B. Ellisor, A.J. Moors, R.S. Pugh, and D.G. Roseneau. 2009. 

Monitoring organic contaminants in eggs of glaucous and glaucous-winged gulls (Larus 

hyperboreus and Larus glaucescens) from Alaska. Environmental Pollution 157: 755-762. 

Vander Pol, S.S., K.A. Hobson, P.R. Becker, R.D. Day, M.B. Ellisor, R.S. Pugh, and D.G. 

Roseneau. 2011. Geographic differences in organic contaminants and stable isotopes (δ13C, δ15N) 

in thick-billed murre (Uria lomvia) eggs from Alaska. Journal of Environmental Monitoring 

(DOI: 10.1039/c0em00347f). 

Venkatesan, M.I. and I.R. Kaplan. 1982. Distribution and transport of hydrocarbons in surface 

sediments of the Alaskan Outer Continental Shelf. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 46:2135­

2149. 

WenFang, S., X. Feng, G. Zhang, L. Ming, R. Yin, Z. Zhao and J. Wang. 2011. High-precision 

measurement of mercury isotope ratios of atmospheric deposition over the past 150 years 

recorded in a peat core take from Hongyuan, Sichuan Province, China. Chinese Science Bulletin 

56:877-882. 

Woodgate, R.A., K. Aagaard, and T. Weingartner. 1995. Monthly temperature, salinity and 

transport variability of the Bering Strait throughflow. Journal of Geophysical Research 

100:18,443-18.457. 

Yin, R., X. Feng and W. Shi. 2010. Application of the stable-isotope system to the study of 

sources and fate of Hg in the environment: A review. Applied Geochemistry 25:1467-1477. 

Yang, L. and R.E. Sturgeon. 2009. Isotopic fractionation of mercury induced by reduction and 

ethylation. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 393:377-385. 

Zhou, X., N.B. Chang and S. Li. 2007. Detection of coastal region sea ice decay from 

orthorectified RADARSTAT-1 ScanSAR imagery: A case study of Bering Strait and Norton 

Sound, Alaska. Journal of Environmental Informatics 10(1):37-46. 

59 
Zou, L., M.-Y. Sun and L. Guo. 2006. Temporal variations of organic carbon inputs into the 

upper Yukon River: Evidence from fatty acids and their stable carbon isotopic compositions in 

dissolved, colloidal and particulate phases. Organic Geochemistry 37:944-956. 

60 
Appendix 1. A typical egg collecting kit used to mail supplies and safely transport murre and gull 

eggs for this study. 

61 
Appendix 2. Murre and gull egg samples banked in the Marine ESB in Charleston, South Carolina, that were us

diphenyl ether (PBDE), polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), organochlorine pesticide, total mercury (Hg), and carbisotope analyses. 

ID Colony Collection Mass (g) Species 

Number Storage Field Location Date Whole Egg Contents Eggshell Length (cm) Width (cm) 

1234 ST09E1234C STLA03COMU08 Uria aalge SE Gulf of Alaska, St. Lazaria I. 7/9/2008 119.2 99.6 18.8 not measured not measured1235 ST09E1235C STLA04COMU08 Uria aalge SE Gulf of Alaska, St. Lazaria I. 7/9/2008 116.2 96.6 19.4 not measured not measured1236 ST09E1236C STLA05COMU08 Uria aalge SE Gulf of Alaska, St. Lazaria I. 7/9/2008 124.0 101.6 18.2 not measured not measured1238 ST09E1238C STLA07COMU08 Uria aalge SE Gulf of Alaska, St. Lazaria I. 7/9/2008 116.2 95.9 19.9 not measured not measured1240 ST09E1240C STLA09COMU08 Uria aalge SE Gulf of Alaska, St. Lazaria I. 7/9/2008 106.5 88.4 17.9 not measured not measured1242 ST09E1242C STLA01TBMU08 Uria lomvia SE Gulf of Alaska, St. Lazaria I. 7/9/2008 99.6 82.1 16.9 not measured not measured1243 ST09E1243C STLA02TBMU08 Uria lomvia SE Gulf of Alaska, St. Lazaria I. 7/9/2008 111.6 92.7 18.6 not measured not measured

1244 ST09E1244C STLA03TBMU08 Uria lomvia SE Gulf of Alaska, St. Lazaria I. 7/9/2008 113.7 96.2 16.8 not measured not measured

1245 ST09E1245C STLA04TBMU08 Uria lomvia SE Gulf of Alaska, St. Lazaria I. 7/9/2008 92.4 74.9 16.9 not measured not measured1246 ST09E1246C STLA05TBMU08 Uria lomvia SE Gulf of Alaska, St. Lazaria I. 7/9/2008 94.4 80.3 13.7 not measured not measured1250 ST09E1250C DIOM04TBMU08 Uria lomvia Bering Strait, Little Diomede I. 7/2/2008 129.8 104.1 21.3 not measured not measured1256 ST09E1256C DIOM10TBMU08 Uria lomvia Bering Strait, Little Diomede I. 7/2/2008 118.5 98.5 19.7 not measured not measured1257 ST09E1257C DIOM11TBMU08 Uria lomvia Bering Strait, Little Diomede I. 7/2/2008 111.5 90.3 20.8 not measured not measured1260 ST09E1260C DIOM14TBMU08 Uria lomvia Bering Strait, Little Diomede I. 7/2/2008 125.0 101.9 22.0 not measured not measured1261 ST09E1261C DIOM15TBMU08 Uria lomvia Bering Strait, Little Diomede I. 7/2/2008 120.2 98.3 21.5 not measured not measured1265 ST09E1265C STLW04COMU08 Uria aalge N Bering Sea, St. Lawrence I. 6/29/2008 126.5 104.9 17.2 not measured not measured1266 ST09E1266C STLW05COMU08 Uria aalge N Bering Sea, St. Lawrence I. 6/29/2008 106.0 84.3 21.1 not measured not measured1267 ST09E1267C STLW06COMU08 Uria aalge N Bering Sea, St. Lawrence I. 6/29/2008 129.5 99.5 29.0 not measured not measured1268 ST09E1268C STLW07COMU08 Uria aalge N Bering Sea, St. Lawrence I. 6/29/2008 122.0 100.9 20.6 not measured not measured1275 ST09E1275C STLW14COMU08 Uria aalge N Bering Sea, St. Lawrence I. 6/29/2008 137.0 107.2 29.1 not measured not measured1278 ST09E1278C STLW02TBMU08 Uria lomvia N Bering Sea, St. Lawrence I. 6/29/2008 130.3 108.9 21.2 not measured not measured1279 ST09E1279C STLW03TBMU08 Uria lomvia N Bering Sea, St. Lawrence I. 6/29/2008 117.2 98.1 18.5 not measured not measured1281 ST09E1281C STLW05TBMU08 Uria lomvia N Bering Sea, St. Lawrence I. 6/29/2008 127.1 104.9 22.0 not measured not measured1284 ST09E1284C STLW08TBMU08 Uria lomvia N Bering Sea, St. Lawrence I. 6/29/2008 123.6 100.1 19.8 not measured not measured1287 ST09E1287C STLW11TBMU08 Uria lomvia N Bering Sea, St. Lawrence I. 6/29/2008 123.8 104.3 19.0 not measured not measured1292 ST09E1292C SLED01COMU08 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Sledge I. 6/21/2008 121.7 94.0 24.1 7.92 4.751295 ST09E1295C SLED05COMU08 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Sledge I. 6/21/2008 126.3 100.9 22.8 7.80 4.181301 ST09E1301C SLED11COMU08 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Sledge I. 6/21/2008 123.3 103.1 18.1 7.62 4.261303 ST09E1303C SLED13COMU08 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Sledge I. 6/21/2008 113.0 92.6 17.9 7.17 4.131305 ST09E1305C SLED15COMU08 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Sledge I. 6/21/2008 121.2 100.6 19.3 7.28 4.301307 ST09E1307C BLUF02COMU08 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Bluff 6/20/2008 116.2 97.8 18.1 not measured not measured

1309 ST09E1309C BLUF04COMU08 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Bluff 6/20/2008 132.0 110.1 21.5 not measured not measured 1314 ST09E1314C BLUF09COMU08 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Bluff 6/20/2008 122.1 101.2 19.8 not measured not measured 1319 ST09E1319C BLUF14COMU08 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Bluff 6/20/2008 117.8 97.8 19.9 not measured not measured 1320 ST09E1320C BLUF15COMU08 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Bluff 6/20/2008 121.3 100.1 20.8 not measured not measured 1321 ST09E1321C STGE01TBMU08 Uria lomvia SE Bering Sea, St. George I. 7/11/2008 90.4 73.4 12.1 6.99 4.31 Egg contained a de1331 ST09E1331C STGE11TBMU08 Uria lomvia SE Bering Sea, St. George I. 7/11/2008 106.0 89.1 16.1 6.94 4.22 The egg contained a1333 ST09E1333C STGE13TBMU08 Uria lomvia SE Bering Sea, St. George I. 7/11/2008 116.2 97.9 18.1 7.04 4.37 The egg 1334 ST09E1334C STGE14TBMU08 Uria lomvia SE Bering Sea, St. George I. 7/11/2008 101.0 88.0 12.9 7.23 4.02 1335 ST09E1335C STGE15TBMU08 Uria lomvia SE Bering Sea, St. George I. 7/11/2008 107.3 91.9 14.9 7.05 4.14 

62 
Appendix 2 (continued). 

ID Colony Collection Mass (g) Species 

Number Storage Field Location Date Whole Egg Contents Eggshell Length (cm) Width (cm) 

1339 ST09E1339C SINU05GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Sinuk River Delta 6/6/2008 98.3 87.1 11.0 6.86 5.15 1340 ST09E1340C SINU06GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Sinuk River Delta 6/6/2008 92.5 80.8 11.4 7.21 4.96 1343 ST09E1343C SINU11GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Sinuk River Delta 6/6/2008 96.2 87.8 8.2 7.12 5.19 1344 ST09E1344C SINU12GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Sinuk River Delta 6/6/2008 95.6 85.6 9.9 7.05 5.12 1345 ST09E1345C SINU13GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Sinuk River Delta 6/6/2008 115.8 104.3 11.2 7.51 5.40 1349 ST09E1349C KUKP04GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus E Chukchi Sea, Kukpuk River Delta 7/5/2008 106.0 94.1 11.3 7.90 5.14 1351 ST09E1351C KUKP06GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus E Chukchi Sea, Kukpuk River Delta 7/5/2008 94.6 83.4 10.9 6.23 4.65 1354 ST09E1354C KUKP10GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus E Chukchi Sea, Kukpuk River Delta 7/5/2008 95.8 85.7 10.1 6.51 4.55 1357 ST09E1357C KUKP13GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus E Chukchi Sea, Kukpuk River Delta 7/5/2008 108.3 96.5 11.5 7.31 4.68 1358 ST09E1358C KUKP14GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus E Chukchi Sea, Kukpuk River Delta 7/5/2008 109.0 96.1 11.2 7.45 5.30 1365 ST09E1365C SAFE06GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Safety Sound 6/12/2008 101.6 88.1 11.1 7.27 5.13 

1367 ST09E1367C SAFE08GLGU08 Somateria mollissima? Norton Sound, Safety Sound 6/12/2008 100.3 88.5 11.6 6.93 5.14 

1368 ST09E1368C SAFE09GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Safety Sound 6/12/2008 112.6 100.2 12.3 7.72 5.19 

1369 ST09E1369C SAFE10GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Safety Sound 6/12/2008 117.4 100.9 11.8 7.73 5.39 

1370 ST09E1370C SAFE12GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Safety Sound 6/12/2008 113.5 96.2 16.5 7.17 5.44 

1371 ST09E1371C CDAR01GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Cape Darby 6/12/2008 91.9 75.8 15.9 7.40 4.96 

1374 ST09E1374C CDAR04GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Cape Darby 6/12/2008 101.7 91.3 9.6 7.28 5.09 

1377 ST09E1377C CDAR07GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Cape Darby 6/12/2008 111.3 99.1 11.8 7.58 5.22 

1379 ST09E1379C CDAR09GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Cape Darby 6/12/2008 115.5 102.8 12.5 7.59 5.35 

1380 ST09E1380C CDAR10GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Cape Darby 6/12/2008 122.2 110.6 10.5 7.79 5.39 

1384 ST09E1384C BLUF06GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Bluff 6/9/2008 103.3 85.7 17.1 6.63 4.78 Several gra

1385 ST09E1385C BLUF07GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Bluff 6/9/2008 108.4 81.8 25.5 7.18 4.68 Several gra1388 ST09E1388C BLUF10GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Bluff 6/9/2008 104.4 92.6 11.0 7.47 4.57 1389 ST09E1389C BLUF11GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Bluff 6/9/2008 113.7 102.3 10.7 7.28 4.88 The 

1390 ST09E1390C GOBA01GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Carolyn I. (Golovin Bay) 6/12/2008 97.1 87.2 9.8 7.37 4.97 1393 ST09E1393C GOBA04GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Carolyn I. (Golovin Bay) 6/12/2008 115.2 104.6 10.2 6.71 4.98 1394 ST09E1394C GOBA06GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Carolyn I. (Golovin Bay) 6/12/2008 120.7 106.3 13.9 7.44 4.83 1397 ST09E1397C GOBA09GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Carolyn I. (Golovin Bay) 6/12/2008 123.5 108.0 14.1 7.10 5.00 1398 ST09E1398C GOBA10GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Carolyn I. (Golovin Bay) 6/12/2008 98.1 88.3 9.5 6.69 4.50 1401 ST09E1401C SHAK02GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Shaktoolik South 6/8/2008 100.4 83.1 17.0 7.50 4.96 Tw

1402 ST09E1402C SHAK03GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Shaktoolik South 6/8/2008 115.4 92.4 15.0 7.74 5.27 Tw

1403 ST09E1403C SHAK04GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Shaktoolik South 6/8/2008 110.5 95.8 14.5 7.52 5.23 Tw

1404 ST09E1404C SHAK05GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Shaktoolik South 6/8/2008 97.2 88.4 9.2 7.58 4.87 Tw

1407 ST09E1407C TINC01GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus NW Seward Peninsula, Tin Creek (SE of Shishmaref) 6/17/2008 100.2 89.9 88.7 79.8 11.4 9.8 6.96 6.79 4.80 4.61 

90.8 81.6 9.2 6.75 4.70 

1411 ST09E1411C TINC05GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus NW Seward Peninsula, Tin Creek (SE of Shishmaref) 6/17/2008 93.0 83.7 9.2 6.82 4.67 

88.6 68.2 16.3 6.51 4.56 99.9 90.0 8.8 7.19 4.77 

1414 ST09E1414C SHFB03GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus NW Seward Peninsula, Arctic Lagoon (SSE of Shishmaref) 6/16/2008 111.3 98.8 11.7 7.81 4.78 

95.4 84.7 10.6 7.61 4.74 97.0 87.0 9.6 6.85 4.70 

1415 ST09E1415C SHFB04GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus NW Seward Peninsula, Arctic Lagoon (SSE of Shishmaref) 6/16/2008 103.8 90.5 9.8 6.64 4.89 

73.8 58.8 14.3 6.42 4.34 

1416 ST09E1416C SHFB05GLGU08 Larus hyperboreus NW Seward Peninsula, Arctic Lagoon (SSE of Shishmaref) 6/16/2008 85.8 88.8 76.2 79.9 9.1 8.3 6.32 6.48 4.58 4.58 Thr

63 
Appendix 2 (continued). 

Number Storage 

ID 

Field Species Colony Location Collection Date Whole Egg Contents Mass (g) Eggshell Length (cm) Width (cm) 

1419 ST10E1419C STUA03GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Stuart Island (South River A) 6/8/2009 88.64 78.8 9.73 7.6 4.7 Eg1420 ST10E1420C STUA04GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Stuart Island (South River A) 6/8/2009 103.93 99.47 90.51 86.31 12.86 12.16 7.44 7.29 5.26 5.15 Egg A had a small, 

1421 ST10E1421C STUA05GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Stuart Island (South River A) 6/8/2009 95.25 81.65 12.92 7.82 4.83 Eg1422 ST10E1422C STUA06GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Stuart Island (South River A) 6/8/2009 105.49 91.14 13.57 7.62 5.2 Egg A had a small, 

1423 ST10E1423C STUA07GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Stuart Island (South River A) 6/8/2009 99.33 87.9 10.94 7.38 5.28 Egg had a 2.5-3.0cm e

1424 ST10E1424C SHAK01GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Shaktoolik South 6/2/2009 116.26 113.54 101.92 101.75 11.16 8.88 7.81 7.62 5.25 5.27 

1426 ST10E1426C SHAK03GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Shaktoolik South 6/2/2009 129.91 110.47 13.17 7.89 5.56 

1427 ST10E1427C SHAK04GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Shaktoolik South 6/2/2009 115.19 99.81 11.69 7.45 5.37 

1428 ST10E1428C SHAK05GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Shaktoolik South 6/2/2009 113.43 107.93 99.23 91.58 10.17 11.71 7.99 7.61 5.12 5.17 

1429 ST10E1429C SHAK06GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Shaktoolik South 6/2/2009 104.68 101.53 93.18 90.35 8.52 9.35 7.31 7.35 5.17 5.08 

1433 ST10E1433C BREV03GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Brevig Mission KTS 5/30/2009 102.89 110.83 94.59 98.14 10.48 10.9 7.48 7.87 5.05 5.16 1435 ST10E1435C BREV05GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Brevig Mission KTS 5/30/2009 128.16 111 12.15 7.84 5.53 

1436 ST10E1436C BREV06GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Brevig Mission KTS 5/30/2009 103.12 91.85 89.6 81.55 13.52 10.3 7.21 7.07 5.19 4.95 

1439 ST10E1439C BREV09GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Brevig Mission KTS 5/30/2009 107.52 106.08 95.81 91.64 11.55 10.37 7.18 7.81 5.29 5.07 

1441 ST10E1441C BREV11GLGU09 Larus hyperboreus Norton Sound, Brevig Mission KTS 5/30/2009 101.91 86.92 11.75 7.09 5.23 1443 ST10E1443C CDEN02COMU09 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Cape Denbigh 6/19/2009 115.9 95.61 18.39 8.56 5.07 1446 ST10E1446C CDEN05COMU09 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Cape Denbigh 6/19/2009 119.28 99.4 17.89 8.26 5.28 1448 ST10E1448C CDEN07COMU09 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Cape Denbigh 6/19/2009 123.21 102.02 18.81 8.86 5.17 1449 ST10E1449C CDEN08COMU09 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Cape Denbigh 6/19/2009 113.68 95.48 15.75 8.41 5.07 1452 ST10E1452C CDEN11COMU09 Uria aalge Norton Sound, Cape Denbigh 6/19/2009 119.68 98.91 18.63 8.34 5.22 1454 ST10E1454C CLIS01UNMU09 Uria spp. E Chukchi Sound, Cape Lisburne 7/5/2009 106.84 86.22 17.62 7.3 5.91 1455 ST10E1455C CLIS02UNMU09 Uria spp. E Chukchi Sound, Cape Lisburne 7/5/2009 109.48 90.29 17.1 8.24 5.11 1457 ST10E1457C CLIS04UNMU09 Uria spp. E Chukchi Sound, Cape Lisburne 7/5/2009 109.51 94.73 13.94 8.13 5.26 1458 ST10E1458C CLIS05UNMU09 Uria spp. E Chukchi Sound, Cape Lisburne 7/5/2009 86 73.64 12.04 7.77 4.74 Egg had a 1.4 c

1460 ST10E1460C CLIS07UNMU09 Uria spp. E Chukchi Sound, Cape Lisburne 7/5/2009 94.28 78.94 13.24 7.56 4.94 Egg had a 1.5 c1463 ST10E1463C STGE03COMU09 Uria aalge SE Bering Sea, St. George Island 6/24/2009 118.52 97.85 17.6 8.54 5.15 1466 ST10E1466C STGE06COMU09 Uria aalge SE Bering Sea, St. George Island 6/24/2009 107.55 90.22 16.04 8.11 5.11 1469 ST10E1469C STGE09COMU09 Uria aalge SE Bering Sea, St. George Island 6/24/2009 117.69 97.05 16.48 8.59 5.19 1470 ST10E1470C STGE10COMU09 Uria aalge SE Bering Sea, St. George Island 6/24/2009 119.21 100.59 16.8 8.88 5.07 1472 ST10E1472C STGE12COMU09 Uria aalge SE Bering Sea, St. George Island 6/24/2009 97.44 82.02 13.67 7.73 4.92 1473 ST10E1473C AIKT01GWGU09 Larus glaucescens E. Aleutian Islands, Aiktak Island 6/21/2009 111.52 96.28 11.18 7.53 5.24 Egg 

99.65 85.92 12.46 7.39 5.04 1474 ST10E1474C AIKT02GWGU09 Larus glaucescens E. Aleutian Islands, Aiktak Island 6/21/2009 98.08 86.31 11.77 7 5.1 

1475 ST10E1475C AIKT03GWGU09 Larus glaucescens E. Aleutian Islands, Aiktak Island 6/21/2009 103.36 89.3 13.59 7.16 5.18 Egg 

1477 ST10E1477C AIKT05GWGU09 Larus glaucescens E. Aleutian Islands, Aiktak Island 6/21/2009 95.66 84.46 9.7 7.43 4.93 Egg 

1478 ST10E1478C AIKT06GWGU09 Larus glaucescens E. Aleutian Islands, Aiktak Island 6/21/2009 91.9 82.34 9.4 7.08 4.99 Egg 

1479 ST10E1479C STPA01TBMU09 Uria lomvia SE Bering Sea, St. Paul Island 6/24/2009 123.82 98.98 21.06 8.41 5.31 1480 ST10E1480C STPA02TBMU09 Uria lomvia SE Bering Sea, St. Paul Island 6/24/2009 105.5 83.22 15.13 7.61 5.09 1482 ST10E1482C STPA04TBMU09 Uria lomvia SE Bering Sea, St. Paul Island 6/24/2009 114.3 92.18 18.49 8.61 5.06 

1485 ST10E1485C STPA07TBMU09 Uria lomvia SE Bering Sea, St. Paul Island 6/24/2009 107.52 90.54 16.64 7.94 5.07 1486 ST10E1486C STPA08TBMU09 Uria lomvia SE Bering Sea, St. Paul Island 6/24/2009 121.1 96.97 19.86 8.18 5.35 

64 
Appendix 3. Hg levels (ng g-1, wet mass) and stable δ15N, δ13C isotopes in murre and gull eggs. 

NIST ID Field ID Species Colony Region Hg (ng/g) 

ST09E1234C STLA03COMU08 Common Murre St. Lazaria I. SE Alaska 205 ST09E1235C STLA04COMU08 Common Murre St. Lazaria I. SE Alaska 113 ST09E1236C STLA05COMU08 Common Murre St. Lazaria I. SE Alaska 153 ST09E1238C STLA07COMU08 Common Murre St. Lazaria I. SE Alaska 236 ST09E1240C STLA09COMU08 Common Murre St. Lazaria I. SE Alaska 183 ST09E1242C STLA01TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. Lazaria I. SE Alaska 158 

ST09E1243C STLA02TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. Lazaria I. SE Alaska 190 

ST09E1244C STLA03TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. Lazaria I. SE Alaska 76 

ST09E1245C STLA04TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. Lazaria I. SE Alaska 166 

ST09E1246C STLA05TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. Lazaria I. SE Alaska 135 

ST09E1250C DIOM04TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre Little Diomede NBS/Chukchi Sea 75 

ST09E1256C DIOM10TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre Little Diomede NBS/Chukchi Sea 56 

ST09E1257C DIOM11TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre Little Diomede NBS/Chukchi Sea 75 ST09E1260C DIOM14TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre Little Diomede NBS/Chukchi Sea 97 

ST09E1261C DIOM15TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre Little Diomede NBS/Chukchi Sea 69 

ST09E1265C STLW04COMU08 Common Murre St. Lawrence I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 69 

ST09E1266C STLW05COMU08 Common Murre St. Lawrence I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 36 

ST09E1267C STLW06COMU08 Common Murre St. Lawrence I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 68 

ST09E1268C STLW07COMU08 Common Murre St. Lawrence I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 40 

ST09E1275C STLW14COMU08 Common Murre St. Lawrence I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 49 

ST09E1278C STLW02TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. Lawrence I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 31 

ST09E1279C STLW03TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. Lawrence I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 41 

ST09E1281C STLW05TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. Lawrence I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 36 

ST09E1284C STLW08TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. Lawrence I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 31 

ST09E1287C STLW11TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. Lawrence I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 12 

ST09E1292C SLED01COMU08 Common Murre Sledge I. Norton Sound 71 

ST09E1295C SLED05COMU08 Common Murre Sledge I. Norton Sound 92 

65 
Appendix 3 (Continued). 

ST09E1301C SLED11COMU08 Common Murre Sledge I. Norton Sound 102 ST09E1303C SLED13COMU08 Common Murre Sledge I. Norton Sound 58 ST09E1305C SLED15COMU08 Common Murre Sledge I. Norton Sound 52 ST09E1307C BLUF02COMU08 Common Murre Bluff Norton Sound 143 

ST09E1309C BLUF04COMU08 Common Murre Bluff Norton Sound 136 ST09E1314C BLUF09COMU08 Common Murre Bluff Norton Sound 144 ST09E1319C BLUF14COMU08 Common Murre Bluff Norton Sound 82 

ST09E1320C BLUF15COMU08 Common Murre Bluff Norton Sound 112 ST09E1321C STGE01TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. George I. SBS 56 

ST09E1331C STGE11TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. George I. SBS 55 ST09E1333C STGE13TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. George I. SBS 91 ST09E1334C STGE14TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. George I. SBS 192 

ST09E1335C STGE15TBMU08 Thick-billed Murre St. George I. SBS 67 ST09E1339C SINU05GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Sinuk River Delta NBS/Chukchi Sea 185 ST09E1340C SINU06GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Sinuk River Delta NBS/Chukchi Sea 213 ST09E1343C SINU11GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Sinuk River Delta NBS/Chukchi Sea 644 ST09E1344C SINU12GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Sinuk River Delta NBS/Chukchi Sea 200 

ST09E1345C SINU13GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Sinuk River Delta NBS/Chukchi Sea 125 ST09E1349C KUKP04GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Kukpuk River Delta NBS/Chukchi Sea 77 ST09E1351C KUKP06GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Kukpuk River Delta NBS/Chukchi Sea 107 ST09E1354C KUKP10GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Kukpuk River Delta NBS/Chukchi Sea 70 ST09E1357C KUKP13GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Kukpuk River Delta NBS/Chukchi Sea 63 ST09E1358C KUKP14GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Kukpuk River Delta NBS/Chukchi Sea 55 ST09E1365C SAFE06GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Safety Sound Norton Sound 132 

ST09E1367C SAFE08GLGU08 Common Eider? Safety Sound Norton Sound 157 

ST09E1368C SAFE09GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Safety Sound Norton Sound 165 

ST09E1369C SAFE10GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Safety Sound Norton Sound 104 

ST09E1370C SAFE12GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Safety Sound Norton Sound 117 

66 
Appendix 3 (Continued). 

ST09E1371C CDAR01GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Cape Darby Norton Sound 142 ST09E1374C CDAR04GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Cape Darby Norton Sound 140 ST09E1377C CDAR07GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Cape Darby Norton Sound 134 ST09E1379C CDAR09GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Cape Darby Norton Sound 175 ST09E1380C CDAR10GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Cape Darby Norton Sound 116 ST09E1384C BLUF06GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Bluff Norton Sound 145 

ST09E1385C BLUF07GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Bluff Norton Sound 195 

ST09E1388C BLUF10GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Bluff Norton Sound 285 

ST09E1389C BLUF11GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Bluff Norton Sound 98 ST09E1390C GOBA01GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Carolyn I. (Golovin Bay) Norton Sound 165 

ST09E1393C GOBA04GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Carolyn I. (Golovin Bay) Norton Sound 150 ST09E1394C GOBA06GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Carolyn I. (Golovin Bay) Norton Sound 96 ST09E1397C GOBA09GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Carolyn I. (Golovin Bay) Norton Sound 120 ST09E1398C GOBA10GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Carolyn I. (Golovin Bay) Norton Sound 83 ST09E1401C SHAK02GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Shaktoolik Norton Sound 209 

ST09E1402C SHAK03GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Shaktoolik Norton Sound 290 ST09E1403C SHAK04GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Shaktoolik Norton Sound 250 

ST09E1404C SHAK05GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Shaktoolik Norton Sound 222 ST09E1407C TINC01GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Shishmaref-Tin Creek NBS/Chukchi Sea 107 ST09E1411C TINC05GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Shishmaref-Tin Creek NBS/Chukchi Sea 180 ST09E1414C SHFB03GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Shishmaref-Egg I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 157 

ST09E1415C SHFB04GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Shishmaref-Egg I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 172 

ST09E1416C SHFB05GLGU08 Glaucous Gull Shishmaref-Egg I. NBS/Chukchi Sea 68 ST10E1419C STUA03GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Stuart Island (Stebbins) Norton Sound 94 ST10E1420C STUA04GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Stuart Island (Stebbins) Norton Sound 227 

ST10E1421C STUA05GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Stuart Island (Stebbins) Norton Sound 108 

ST10E1422C STUA06GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Stuart Island (Stebbins) Norton Sound 260 

ST10E1423C STUA07GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Stuart Island (Stebbins) Norton Sound 87 

67 
Appendix 3 (Continued). 

ST10E1424C SHAK01GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Shaktoolik (South) Norton Sound 104 ST10E1426C SHAK03GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Shaktoolik (South) Norton Sound 158 ST10E1427C SHAK04GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Shaktoolik (South) Norton Sound 123 ST10E1428C SHAK05GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Shaktoolik (South) Norton Sound 154 ST10E1429C SHAK06GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Shaktoolik (South) Norton Sound 164 ST10E1433C BREV03GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Brevig Mission NBS/Chukchi Sea 246 ST10E1435C BREV05GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Brevig Mission NBS/Chukchi Sea 191 ST10E1436C BREV06GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Brevig Mission NBS/Chukchi Sea 162 ST10E1439C BREV09GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Brevig Mission NBS/Chukchi Sea 160 ST10E1441C BREV11GLGU09 Glaucous Gull Brevig Mission NBS/Chukchi Sea 125 ST10E1443C CDEN02COMU09 Common Murre Cape Denbigh Norton Sound 156 

ST10E1446C CDEN05COMU09 Common Murre Cape Denbigh Norton Sound 92 

ST10E1448C CDEN07COMU09 Common Murre Cape Denbigh Norton Sound 100 ST10E1449C CDEN08COMU09 Common Murre Cape Denbigh Norton Sound 122 ST10E1452C CDEN11COMU09 Common Murre Cape Denbigh Norton Sound 189 ST10E1454C CLIS01UNMU09 Unknown Murre Cape Lisburne NBS/Chukchi Sea 262 ST10E1455C CLIS02UNMU09 Unknown Murre Cape Lisburne NBS/Chukchi Sea 2 

ST10E1457C CLIS04UNMU09 Unknown Murre Cape Lisburne NBS/Chukchi Sea 11 ST10E1458C CLIS05UNMU09 Unknown Murre Cape Lisburne NBS/Chukchi Sea 20 ST10E1460C CLIS07UNMU09 Unknown Murre Cape Lisburne NBS/Chukchi Sea 18 ST10E1463C STGE03COMU09 Common Murre St. George I. SBS 7 

ST10E1466C STGE06COMU09 Common Murre St. George I. SBS 8 

ST10E1469C STGE09COMU09 Common Murre St. George I. SBS 10 

ST10E1470C STGE10COMU09 Common Murre St. George I. SBS 10 

ST10E1472C STGE12COMU09 Common Murre St. George I. SBS 10 

ST10E1473C AIKT01GWGU09 Glaucous-Winged Gull Aiktak I. SBS 125 ST10E1474C AIKT02GWGU09 Glaucous-Winged Gull Aiktak I. SBS 98 ST10E1475C AIKT03GWGU09 Glaucous-Winged Gull Aiktak I. SBS 55 

68 
Appendix 3 (Continued). 

ST10E1477C AIKT05GWGU09 Glaucous-Winged Gull Aiktak I. SBS 117 ST10E1478C AIKT06GWGU09 Glaucous-Winged Gull Aiktak I. SBS 80 ST10E1479C STPA01TBMU09 Thick-billed Murre St. Paul I. SBS 12 

ST10E1480C STPA02TBMU09 Thick-billed Murre St. Paul I. SBS 16 ST10E1482C STPA04TBMU09 Thick-billed Murre St. Paul I. SBS 9 

ST10E1485C STPA07TBMU09 Thick-billed Murre St. Paul I. SBS 44 

ST10E1486C STPA08TBMU09 Thick-billed Murre St. Paul I. SBS 16 

69 
Appendix 4. Hg isotopes measured in common and thick-billed murre eggs. 

NIST ID Species Colony Hg (ng g-1) δ199Hg (‰) δ200Hg (‰) δ201Hg (‰) δ202Hg (‰) δ204Hg (‰) 

ST09E1234C Common Murre St. Lazaria I. 205 1.56 0.55 1.89 1.02 1.45 

ST09E1235C Common Murre St. Lazaria I. 113 1.52 0.51 1.62 0.85 1.12 

ST09E1236C Common Murre St. Lazaria I. 153 1.47 0.55 1.70 0.90 1.25 

ST09E1238C Common Murre St. Lazaria I. 236 1.53 0.64 1.9 1.18 1.73 

ST09E1240C Common Murre St. Lazaria I. 183 1.31 0.39 1.57 0.75 1.03 

ST09E1242C Thick-billed Murre St. Lazaria I. 158 1.47 0.51 1.69 0.84 1.24 

ST09E1243C Thick-billed Murre St. Lazaria I. 190 1.58 0.49 1.77 0.84 1.07 

ST09E1244C Thick-billed Murre St. Lazaria I. 76 1.62 0.54 1.84 0.84 1.07 

ST09E1245C Thick-billed Murre St. Lazaria I. 166 1.47 0.61 1.88 0.98 1.41 

ST09E1246C Thick-billed Murre St. Lazaria I. 135 1.52 0.56 1.82 0.99 1.36 

ST09E1250C Thick-billed Murre Little Diomede 75 0.84 0.31 1.01 0.62 0.93 

ST09E1256C Thick-billed Murre Little Diomede 56 0.82 0.23 0.98 0.49 0.68 

ST09E1257C Thick-billed Murre Little Diomede 75 1.05 0.56 1.44 1.10 1.58 

ST09E1260C Thick-billed Murre Little Diomede 97 0.72 0.29 0.90 0.53 0.84 

70 
Appendix 4 (Continued). 

ST09E1261C Thick-billed Murre Little Diomede 69 0.90 0.32 1.01 0.59 0.85 

ST09E1265C Common Murre St. Lawrence I. 69 0.97 0.28 1.12 0.62 0.77 

ST09E1266C Common Murre St. Lawrence I. 36 1.10 0.33 1.17 0.61 0.73 

ST09E1267C Common Murre St. Lawrence I. 68 1.03 0.50 1.36 0.95 1.32 

ST09E1268C Common Murre St. Lawrence I. 40 1.01 0.40 1.14 0.69 0.88 

ST09E1275C Common Murre St. Lawrence I. 49 0.89 0.37 1.06 0.76 1.07 

ST09E1278C Thick-billed Murre St. Lawrence I. 31 0.94 0.18 0.89 0.32 0.68 

ST09E1279C Thick-billed Murre St. Lawrence I. 41 1.15 0.74 1.69 1.15 1.63 

ST09E1281C Thick-billed Murre St. Lawrence I. 36 1.07 0.54 1.60 1.05 1.57 

ST09E1284C Thick-billed Murre St. Lawrence I. 31 1.04 0.44 1.45 1.08 1.49 

ST09E1287C Thick-billed Murre St. Lawrence I. 12 1.30 0.48 1.48 0.91 1.25 

ST09E1292C Common Murre Sledge I. 71 0.94 0.50 1.31 0.85 1.13 

ST09E1295C Common Murre Sledge I. 92 0.73 0.44 0.93 0.61 1.01 

ST09E1301C Common Murre Sledge I. 102 0.96 0.38 1.13 0.70 1.09 

ST09E1303C Common Murre Sledge I. 58 0.73 0.4 1.06 0.74 1.06 

71 
Appendix 4 (Continued). 

ST09E1305C Common Murre Sledge I. 52 0.63 0.36 0.72 0.51 0.76 

ST09E1307C Common Murre Bluff I. 143 0.63 0.17 0.61 0.26 0.32 

ST09E1309C Common Murre Bluff I. 136 0.79 0.28 0.88 0.48 0.68 

ST09E1314C Common Murre Bluff I. 144 0.63 0.29 0.7 0.45 0.65 

ST09E1319C Common Murre Bluff I. 82 0.88 0.25 0.85 0.33 0.46 

ST09E1320C Common Murre Bluff I. 112 0.59 0.16 0.59 0.28 0.44 

ST09E1321C Thick-billed Murre St. George I. 56 1.4 0.4 1.41 0.54 0.72 ST09E1331C Thick-billed Murre St. George I. 55 1.24 0.29 1.21 0.43 0.43 

ST09E1333C Thick-billed Murre St. George I. 91 1.14 0.25 1.22 0.39 0.56 

ST09E1334C Thick-billed Murre St. George I. 192 1.3 0.5 1.52 0.82 1.01 

ST09E1335C Thick-billed Murre St. George I. 67 1.33 0.26 1.3 0.42 0.55 

ST10E1443C Common Murre Cape Denbigh 156 0.69 0.32 0.9 0.59 0.95 

ST10E1446C Common Murre Cape Denbigh 92 0.79 0.25 0.89 0.51 0.74 

ST10E1448C Common Murre Cape Denbigh 100 0.77 0.24 0.82 0.45 0.59 

ST10E1449C Common Murre Cape Denbigh 122 0.71 0.3 0.87 0.55 0.8 

ST10E1452C Common Murre Cape Denbigh 189 0.68 0.27 0.85 0.47 0.69 

72 
Appendix 5. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass, mean ± standard deviation

material compared to consensus values and maximum limits of detection. 

Murre Egg CM Max LOD 

Compound Consensus Values 2008 Batch 2009 Batch 2008 Batch 

% lipid 10.7 ± 0.643 10.9 8.77 ± 0.17 2,4'-DDD <0.100 <LOQ <LOD 0.197 2,4'-DDT 0.108 ± 0.10 <LOD <LOQ 0.196 4,4,'-DDD <LOD <LOD 0.199 4,4'-DDE 69.5 ± 6.3 67.7 66.3 ± 0.16 0.242 4,4'-DDT <0.100 <LOQ <LOD 0.197 HCB 34.0 ± 5.3 38.7 39.3 ± 0.26 0.0741 α-HCH 1.16 ± 0.18 1.20 1.10 ± 0.028 0.202 β-HCH 24.9 ± 4.3 24.0 25.7 ± 1.4 0.201 γ-HCH 0.342 ± 0.024 0.363 0.341 ± 0.0074 0.400 

Octachlorosytrene 0.913 ± 0.087 0.915 0.971 ± 0.010 0.178 

Oxychlordane 7.16 ± 0.7 6.55 6.71 ± 0.027 0.193 

Pentachlorobenzene 1.93 ± 0.5 2.09 2.44 ± 0.031 0.0650 Mirex 1.58 ± 0.16 1.62 1.60 ± 0.028 0.199 

Compound Consensus Values Gulls Murres GLGUs Murres & GWGUs Gulls Murres GLG

Cis -chlordane 0.254 ± 0.024 0.177 0.257 0.241 ± 0.012 0.238 ± 0.012 0.0742 0.156 0.08

Cis -nonachlor 1.94 ± 0.48 1.90 2.03 2.19 ± 0.015 2.38 ± 0.064 0.0746 0.0667 0.1

Trans -chlordane <0.100 0.145 0.149 <LOD <LOD 0.0750 0.0671 0.07

Trans -nonachlor 0.481 ± 0.1 0.402 0.400 0.437 ± 0.0055 0.418 ± 0.0065 0.0748 0.0669 0.08

Heptachlor epoxide 4.41 ± 0.3 3.47 3.97 4.34 ± 0.10 4.64 ± 0.16 1.30 0.177 0.5

73 
Appendix 6. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) massfractions (ng g-1 wet mass, mean ± standard deviation) in murre egg control material compared to 

consensus values and maximum limits of detection (compounds shown in red and blue were 

above and below reference value ranges, respectively). 

Murre Egg Control Material Max LOD or LOQ 

Compound Consensus Values 2008 2009 2008 2009 

BDE47 0.771 ± 0.14 0.817 0.733 ± 0.023 0.147 0.0874 

BDE99 0.530 ± 0.21 <LOQ 0.267 ± 0.022 0.956 0.0797 

BDE100 0.310 ± 0.13 0.479 0.288 ± 0.017 0.518 0.0873 

PCB 8 <0.100 <LOD <LOD 0.0256 0.00709 

PCB 18 <0.100 <LOD <LOD 0.0234 0.00650 

PCB 28+31 2.49 ± 0.51 2.95 2.02 ± 0.011 0.0737 0.0204 

PCB 29 <0.100 <LOQ <LOD 0.0194 0.00117 

PCB 44 <0.100 0.0577 0.0754 ± 0.0032 0.0445 0.0605 

PCB 45 <0.100 0.00950 0.0306 ± 0.0023 0.00700 0.00905 

PCB 49 <0.100 0.106 0.0902 ± 0.0023 0.0566 0.0341 

PCB 52 0.234 ± 0.095 0.161 0.192 ± 0.0020 0.0580 0.100 

PCB 56 0.746 ± 0.059 0.707 0.585 ± 0.023 0.0491 0.145 

PCB 63 0.500 ± 0.043 0.190 0.170 ± 0.00098 0.205 0.0324 

PCB 66 2.41 ± 0.12 2.32 1.87 ± 0.069 0.346 0.146 

PCB 70 0.205 ± 0.018 0.121 0.124 ± 0.0050 0.0260 0.0491 

PCB 74 1.92 ± 0.061 1.97 1.44 ± 0.041 0.275 0.0969 

PCB 79 0.165 ± 0.026 0.0221 0.0294 ± 0.0025 0.00740 0.0273 

PCB 82 <0.100 0.0284 0.0363 ± 0.0018 0.0104 0.0306 

PCB 87 0.106 ± 0.0051 0.0880 0.105 ± 0.0024 0.0437 0.0121 

PCB 92 <0.100 0.0772 0.0942 ± 0.0017 0.0264 0.0886 

PCB 95+121 <0.100 <LOD 0.0608 ± 0.0032 0.0732 0.0203 

PCB 99 3.93 ± 0.17 5.03 4.02 ± 0.10 0.151 0.0418 

PCB 101 0.835 ± 0.7 0.261 0.420 ± 0.011 0.0868 0.142 

PCB 105 1.84 ± 0.47 1.86 1.72 ± 0.016 0.0715 0.152 

PCB 106 <0.100 0.0279 0.0175 ± 0.0012 0.0102 0.0169 

PCB 107 0.472 ± 0.022 0.478 0.414 ± 0.012 0.0226 0.0493 

PCB 110 <0.100 <LOD 0.0367 ± 0.0023 0.100 0.0278 

PCB 112 <LOD 0.0196 ± 0.0013 0.00650 0.00692 

PCB 114 0.271 ± 0.017 0.254 0.186 ± 0.0019 0.0197 0.0338 

PCB 118 6.53 ± 1.1 7.28 5.89 ± 0.091 0.258 0.497 

PCB 119 <0.100 0.0850 0.0870 ± 0.0060 0.00480 0.0101 

PCB 127 <0.100 <LOD <LOQ 0.0104 0.0293 

PCB 128 0.809 ± 0.077 0.895 0.749 ± 0.013 0.0660 0.0850 

PCB 130 0.298 ± 0.018 0.362 0.297 ± 0.012 0.126 0.0386 

PCB 137 1.12 ± 2.2 0.280 0.207 ± 0.00095 0.0116 0.0350 

PCB 138 5.76 ± 1.5 5.22 4.88 ± 0.16 0.372 0.753 

PCB 146 2.47 ± 0.022 2.74 2.21 ± 0.0094 0.0865 0.212 

PCB 149 0.403 ± 0.1 0.450 0.409 ± 0.019 0.226 0.200 

74 
 

Appendix 6 (Continued). 

Murre Egg Control Material Max LOD or LOQ 

Compound Consensus Values 2008 2009 2008 2009 

PCB 151 <0.100 0.0812 0.0152 ± 0.00036 0.0814 0.0155 

PCB 153+132 11.0 ± 0.26 12.8 11.1 ± 0.045 0.670 1.26 

PCB 154 <0.100 0.0994 0.0945 ± 0.00078 0.0725 0.0601 

PCB 156 0.557 ± 0.12 0.694 0.461 ± 0.0086 0.0896 0.0848 

PCB 157 0.210 ± 0.014 0.195 0.129 ± 0.0011 0.0415 0.0354 

PCB 158 0.317 ± 0.063 0.344 0.221 ± 0.014 0.0181 0.0562 

PCB 159 <0.100 <LOQ 0.00319 ± 0.00034 0.00740 0.00257 

PCB 163 2.00 ± 0.16 2.41 1.94 ± 0.0098 0.0852 0.205 

PCB 165 0.117 ± 0.0090 0.0476 0.0406 ± 0.0022 0.00600 0.0360 

PCB 166 0.253 ± 0.023 0.0602 0.117 ± 0.0050 0.00940 0.0281 

PCB 167 0.468 ± 0.037 0.361 0.359 ± 0.012 0.0232 0.0542 

PCB 170 1.47 ± 0.72 1.25 1.01 ± 0.039 0.0848 0.245 

PCB 172 0.371 ± 0.028 0.397 0.313 ± 0.0021 0.0206 0.0505 

PCB 174 <0.100 0.0831 0.0922 ± 0.00078 0.0317 0.0693 

PCB 175 0.266 ± 0.019 0.0669 0.0872 ± 0.0037 0.0122 0.0350 

PCB 176 0.171 ± 0.024 0.0329 0.0345 ± 0.0030 0.00930 0.0339 

PCB 177 0.395 ± 0.092 0.304 0.340 ± 0.016 0.0371 0.105 

PCB 178 0.418 ± 0.019 0.301 0.424 ± 0.0077 0.0301 0.0878 

PCB 180+193 2.28 ± 0.18 2.48 2.28 ± 0.017 0.252 0.632 

PCB 183 0.838 ± 0.094 0.712 0.721 ± 0.019 0.0407 0.156 

PCB 185 <0.100 0.0251 0.0229 ± 0.00053 0.0115 0.0149 

PCB 187 2.94 ± 0.09 2.63 2.89 ± 0.037 0.198 0.151 

PCB 188 0.194 ± 0.019 0.0370 0.0350 ± 0.0020 0.00510 0.0197 

PCB 189 <0.100 0.0214 <LOQ 0.0196 0.0121 

PCB 191 <0.100 0.0298 <LOQ 0.0129 0.0270 

PCB 194 0.316 ± 0.029 0.332 0.314 ± 0.011 0.0370 0.0775 

PCB 195 0.148 ± 0.019 0.139 0.131 ± 0.0023 0.0450 0.0506 

PCB 196 0.724 ± 0.061 0.758 0.558 ± 0.025 0.462 0.336 

PCB 197 0.148 ± 0.011 0.0654 0.0492 ± 0.0021 0.00610 0.0265 

PCB 199 0.631 ± 0.022 2.99 2.07 ± 0.071 0.732 0.543 

PCB 200 <0.100 <LOD <LOQ 0.00490 0.0222 

PCB 201 0.198 ± 0.017 0.948 0.839 ± 0.022 0.0345 0.207 

PCB 202 <0.100 0.0564 <LOQ 0.0371 0.147 

PCB 205 <0.100 0.0257 0.0419 ± 0.0034 0.00520 0.0304 

PCB 206 <0.100 0.169 <LOQ 0.0352 0.238 

PCB 207 <0.100 0.0725 0.0844 ± 0.0037 0.0137 0.0424 

PCB 208 <0.100 0.0598 <LOQ 0.0249 0.0886 

PCB 209 <0.100 0.166 0.0835 ± 0.0053 0.0379 0.0609 

75 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

2,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

4,4,' DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

4,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trans-chlordane <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

Appendix 7. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

unidentified murre eggs collected at Cape Lisburne, Alaska in 2009. 

Compound 1454 1455 1457 1458 1460 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 7.61 9.56 9.19 11.0 9.12 9.31 1.2 13 

-

4,4'-DDE 37.6 48.2 37.9 49.7 29.4 40.6 8.4 21 

HCB 53.4 76.4 52.7 65.1 42.9 58.1 13 22 

α-HCH <LOD 0.699 0.483 0.665 0.467 0.579 0.12 21 

β-HCH 12.6 30.8 22.0 22.1 14.0 20.3 7.3 36 

γ-HCH 0.574 0.160 <LOD 0.167 0.110 0.253 0.22 85 

Octachlorosytrene 1.63 2.09 1.49 1.98 1.32 1.70 0.33 19 

Oxychlordane 4.95 7.46 5.37 6.78 3.92 5.70 1.4 25 

Pentachlorobenzene 2.81 5.46 3.11 5.28 2.90 3.91 1.3 34 

Mirex 1.10 2.00 1.05 1.27 0.763 1.24 0.46 37 

Cis-chlordane 0.0794 0.134 <LOD 0.135 0.0889 0.109 0.029 27 

Cis-nonachlor 1.23 1.47 1.09 1.42 0.935 1.23 0.22 18 

Trans-nonachlor 0.165 0.149 0.0940 0.125 0.116 0.130 0.028 21 

Heptachlor epoxide 2.17 4.27 3.08 3.58 2.54 3.13 0.83 27 

76 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

2,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

4,4,' DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

4,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

γ-HCH 0.361 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 8. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

thick-billed murre eggs collected at Little Diomede Island, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1250 1256 1257 1260 1261 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 8.84 10.3 9.77 9.74 10.3 9.80 0.61 6.2 

-

4,4'-DDE 41.6 54.7 49.8 50.5 46.4 48.6 4.9 10 

HCB 63.0 65.9 57.6 67.7 49.5 60.7 7.4 12 

α-HCH 0.836 0.705 0.387 0.396 0.514 0.568 0.20 35 

β-HCH 19.5 21.7 16.2 17.8 20.5 19.1 2.2 11 

Octachlorosytrene 1.76 2.02 1.72 2.02 1.21 1.75 0.33 19 

Oxychlordane 6.18 6.46 4.83 5.16 5.00 5.52 0.74 13 

Pentachlorobenzene 2.14 1.97 1.20 1.43 1.47 1.64 0.40 24 

Mirex 1.72 1.75 1.20 1.52 1.49 1.54 0.22 14 

Cis-chlordane 0.275 0.305 0.197 0.245 0.303 0.265 0.045 17 

Cis-nonachlor 1.58 1.40 0.764 0.945 1.41 1.22 0.35 28 

Trans-chlordane 0.0673 0.0869 <LOD <LOD 0.0669 0.0737 0.011 15 

Trans-nonachlor 0.157 0.243 0.0721 0.0816 0.183 0.148 0.072 49 

Heptachlor epoxide 3.01 2.88 1.83 1.87 2.64 2.44 0.56 23 

77 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

2,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

4,4,' DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

4,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trans-chlordane <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

Appendix 9. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

common murre eggs collected at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1265 1266 1267 1268 1275 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 8.29 10.6 9.58 9.13 9.11 9.35 0.86 9.2 

-

4,4'-DDE 52.3 64.6 37.3 34.5 39.8 45.7 13 27 

HCB 17.0 26.3 49.0 32.7 50.8 35.1 15 42 

α-HCH 0.539 0.528 0.658 0.798 0.658 <LOQ 0.11 17 

β-HCH 5.93 6.98 12.0 11.5 12.4 <LOQ 3.1 31 

Octachlorosytrene 0.702 0.912 1.51 1.03 1.37 1.11 0.33 30 

Oxychlordane 3.11 2.64 4.28 4.18 4.63 3.77 0.85 22 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.825 1.26 2.01 0.926 1.71 1.35 0.51 38 

Mirex 0.728 0.775 0.879 1.16 1.02 0.912 0.18 19 

Cis-chlordane 0.215 0.257 0.199 0.220 0.217 0.222 0.021 9.7 

Cis-nonachlor 0.407 0.302 0.531 0.538 0.655 0.487 0.14 28 

Trans-nonachlor 0.0944 0.110 0.0665 0.0952 <LOD 0.0914 0.018 20 

Heptachlor epoxide 0.865 1.22 1.43 1.54 1.40 1.29 0.26 20 

78 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

4,4,' DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

4,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ 0.480 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trans-chlordane <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

Appendix 10. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in thickbilled murre eggs collected at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1278 1279 1281 1284 1287 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 8.55 9.67 9.83 8.87 8.79 9.14 0.57 6.2 

2,4'-DDT 0.197 0.173 0.387 0.133 <LOD 0.223 0.11 51 

-

4,4'-DDE 44.7 35.4 27.5 38.8 39.9 37.2 6.4 17 

HCB 47.2 48.0 44.4 55.3 49.0 48.8 4.0 8.2 

α-HCH 0.576 0.709 0.471 0.724 0.871 0.670 0.15 23 

β-HCH 17.5 12.6 9.23 13.9 0.0808 10.7 6.6 62 

Octachlorosytrene 1.49 1.39 1.22 1.63 1.58 1.46 0.17 11 

Oxychlordane 5.39 3.68 2.99 4.73 5.34 4.43 1.1 24 

Pentachlorobenzene 1.21 1.37 0.998 1.68 1.03 1.26 0.28 22 

Mirex 1.11 1.11 1.02 1.50 1.31 1.21 0.19 16 

Cis-chlordane 0.206 0.188 0.185 0.220 0.200 0.200 0.014 7.2 

Cis-nonachlor 0.739 0.415 0.302 0.597 0.680 0.547 0.18 34 

Trans-nonachlor <LOD 0.0732 <LOD 0.0790 0.110 0.0875 0.020 23 

Heptachlor epoxide 2.25 1.33 1.06 1.66 0.901 1.44 0.53 37 

79 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ 0.0984 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

2,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 11. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

common murre eggs collected at Sledge Island, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1292 1295 1301 1303 1305 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 8.66 7.57 9.66 9.95 9.83 9.14 1.0 11 

4,4,'-DDD <LOD <LOD 0.105 0.0777 0.155 0.113 0.039 35 

4,4'-DDE 31.2 34.6 45.3 37.8 45.8 38.9 6.5 17 

4,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ 0.174 0.142 0.128 0.148 0.023 16 

HCB 42.7 54.9 37.7 51.5 64.6 50.3 11 21 

α-HCH 0.526 0.449 0.657 0.676 0.497 0.561 0.10 18 

β-HCH 15.1 12.5 11.7 21.9 32.6 18.8 8.7 47 

Octachlorosytrene 1.12 1.76 1.18 1.38 1.88 1.46 0.34 23 

Oxychlordane 3.75 4.10 3.83 4.85 7.65 4.83 1.6 34 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.690 1.04 1.14 1.38 1.07 1.06 0.25 23 

Mirex 1.06 1.55 1.20 1.59 2.67 1.61 0.63 39 

Cis-chlordane 0.282 0.223 0.278 0.336 0.686 0.361 0.19 52 

Cis-nonachlor 1.01 0.706 0.923 1.41 5.70 1.95 2.1 110 

Trans-chlordane <LOD <LOD 0.112 0.0868 0.832 0.344 0.42 120 

Trans-nonachlor 0.129 0.0742 0.197 0.261 3.86 0.904 1.7 180 

Heptachlor epoxide 2.08 1.49 1.73 3.16 8.06 3.30 2.7 83 

80 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

2,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

4,4,' DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

4,4'-DDT 0.131 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

γ-HCH 0.381 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trans-chlordane <LOD 0.454 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

Appendix 12. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

common murre eggs collected at Bluff, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1307 1309 1314 1319 1320 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 8.58 8.48 9.45 9.82 8.41 8.95 0.64 7.2 

-

4,4'-DDE 47.6 30.9 38.5 31.0 32.3 36.1 7.1 20 

HCB 72.6 32.7 46.3 44.4 42.4 47.7 15 31 

α-HCH 0.537 0.318 0.224 0.299 0.330 0.342 0.12 34 

β-HCH 22.6 21.3 10.0 16.1 19.3 17.9 5.0 28 

Octachlorosytrene 2.40 0.972 1.57 1.05 1.27 1.45 0.58 40 

Oxychlordane 6.23 5.05 3.49 3.75 4.46 4.60 1.1 24 

Pentachlorobenzene 1.22 0.622 0.763 1.03 0.730 0.872 0.24 28 

Mirex 3.63 1.85 2.34 1.54 2.31 2.34 0.80 34 

Cis-chlordane 0.234 0.318 0.167 0.200 0.200 0.224 0.058 26 

Cis-nonachlor 1.35 5.51 0.480 1.05 1.61 2.00 2.0 100 

Trans-nonachlor 0.153 1.94 <LOD 0.144 0.129 0.592 0.90 150 

Heptachlor epoxide 2.76 4.84 0.870 2.10 2.94 2.70 1.4 53 

81 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

2,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

4,4,' DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

4,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

α-HCH <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

γ-HCH <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trans-chlordane <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

Appendix 13. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

common murre eggs collected at Cape Denbigh, Alaska in 2009. 

Compound 1443 1446 1448 1449 1452 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 8.11 8.48 8.92 9.12 8.86 8.70 0.40 4.6 

-

4,4'-DDE 21.8 28.6 30.3 35.2 34.0 30.0 5.3 18 

HCB 47.2 41.8 49.1 51.8 52.8 48.5 4.4 9.0 

β-HCH 17.4 13.0 21.5 8.42 20.7 16.2 5.5 34 

Octachlorosytrene 1.26 1.12 1.39 1.48 1.27 1.30 0.14 11 

Oxychlordane 2.82 2.54 4.88 2.55 3.74 3.31 1.0 30 

Pentachlorobenzene 1.59 2.86 2.21 2.86 2.84 2.47 0.56 23 

Mirex 1.27 0.993 1.70 0.918 1.81 1.34 0.40 30 

Cis-chlordane 0.0782 <LOD 0.157 0.255 0.128 0.154 0.074 48 

Cis-nonachlor 1.14 0.860 1.42 0.792 1.98 1.24 0.48 39 

Trans-nonachlor 0.0826 <LOD 0.171 <LOD 0.267 0.173 0.092 53 

Heptachlor epoxide 2.26 1.79 3.00 1.57 2.94 2.31 0.65 28 

82 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

2,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

4,4,' DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

4,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cis-chlordane <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.117 <LOD <LOD 

 

Trans-chlordane <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

Appendix 14. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in thickbilled murre eggs collected at St. Paul Island Alaska in 2009. 

Compound 1479 1480 1482 1485 1486 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 9.46 9.55 10.0 9.45 9.00 9.50 0.36 3.8 

-

4,4'-DDE 52.2 77.3 39.4 28.6 38.3 47.2 19 40
 

HCB 33.2 39.7 32.6 49.5 23.5 35.7 9.6 27
 

α-HCH 0.648 0.571 0.361 0.413 0.466 0.492 0.12 24
 

β-HCH 16.0 13.3 15.0 24.2 7.62 15.2 6.0 39
 

γ-HCH 0.215 0.165 0.178 0.171 0.197 0.185 0.021 11
 

Octachlorosytrene 0.788 0.972 0.791 1.05 0.689 0.859 0.15 17
 

Oxychlordane 4.35 3.47 2.90 4.71 1.98 3.48 1.1 32
 

Pentachlorobenzene 3.98 2.47 1.61 4.31 2.62 3.00 1.1 37
 

Mirex 0.855 1.00 0.873 0.899 0.395 0.805 0.24 29
 

Cis-nonachlor 0.889 0.635 0.874 1.17 0.535 0.821 0.25 30 

Trans-nonachlor <LOD 0.235 <LOD 0.120 <LOD 0.178 0.081 46
 

Heptachlor epoxide 2.81 1.85 2.13 3.89 1.63 2.46 0.92 37
 

83 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.475 <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trans-chlordane <LOD 0.0698 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

Appendix 15. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in thickbilled murre eggs collected at St. George Island, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1321 1331 1333 1334 1335 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 10.0 10.8 11.5 9.45 8.97 10.1 1.0 9.9 

2,4'-DDT 0.186 0.0895 <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.138 0.068 49 

4,4,'-DDD 0.285 0.185 <LOD 0.163 <LOD 0.211 0.065 31 

4,4'-DDE 117 98.1 99.4 91.6 98.9 101 9.3 9.2 

4,4'-DDT 0.167 0.373 <LOQ <LOQ 0.222 0.254 0.11 42 

HCB 28.8 19.0 33.5 16.5 21.4 23.8 7.1 30 

α-HCH 0.782 1.42 0.954 0.998 1.15 1.06 0.24 23 

β-HCH 10.8 7.40 10.6 5.61 7.59 8.40 2.2 27 

Octachlorosytrene 1.14 0.865 1.05 0.834 0.922 0.962 0.13 14 

Oxychlordane 5.52 4.16 4.61 2.99 3.39 4.13 1.0 24 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.981 0.167 0.948 0.712 0.467 0.655 0.34 52 

Mirex 1.53 1.23 1.13 1.09 1.23 1.24 0.17 14 

Cis-chlordane 0.296 0.375 0.219 0.190 0.224 0.261 0.075 29 

Cis-nonachlor 0.694 0.810 0.162 0.135 0.541 0.468 0.31 66 

Trans-nonachlor 0.120 0.180 0.0754 0.0951 0.0700 0.108 0.045 41 

Heptachlor epoxide 1.50 1.24 1.42 0.997 1.25 1.28 0.20 15 

84 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

4,4,' DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

4,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cis-chlordane <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.0787 <LOD <LOD 

 

Trans-chlordane <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

Trans-nonachlor <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

Appendix 16. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

common murre eggs collected at St. George Island, Alaska in 2009. 

Compound 1463 1466 1469 1470 1472 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 8.23 9.39 8.25 8.92 10.1 8.97 0.78 8.7 

2,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.436 0.580 0.508 0.10 20 

-

4,4'-DDE 32.7 36.2 36.4 34.5 33.8 34.7 1.6 4.5 

HCB 41.5 42.1 34.5 41.5 45.1 40.9 3.9 9.5 

α-HCH 0.932 1.10 0.448 1.05 0.744 0.854 0.26 31 

β-HCH 28.1 26.6 14.4 20.8 19.4 21.8 5.6 26 

γ-HCH 0.253 0.387 0.133 0.245 0.340 0.272 0.098 36 

Octachlorosytrene 1.02 1.15 1.07 1.21 1.21 1.13 0.083 7.4 

Oxychlordane 2.84 4.48 4.06 4.07 3.71 3.83 0.62 16 

Pentachlorobenzene 3.40 2.21 1.05 3.17 3.08 2.58 0.97 37 

Mirex 0.920 1.08 1.05 0.931 0.816 0.958 0.11 11 

Cis-nonachlor 0.840 1.04 0.563 1.02 0.867 0.867 0.19 22 

Heptachlor epoxide 2.42 3.15 2.51 2.84 2.70 2.72 0.29 11 

85 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

2,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

4,4,' DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.285 <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.397 <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trans-chlordane <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.870 <LOD 

 

 

Appendix 17. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

common murre eggs collected at St. Lazaria Island Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1234 1235 1236 1238 1240 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 8.86 8.24 8.11 9.52 10.0 8.95 0.82 9.2 

-

4,4'-DDE 99.9 77.3 124 303 115 144 91 63 

4,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ 0.173 0.168 0.246 0.196 0.044 23 

HCB 24.7 19.5 30.0 28.6 21.5 24.9 4.5 18 

α-HCH 0.478 0.815 1.38 0.966 1.66 1.06 0.47 44 

β-HCH 12.2 6.75 11.1 14.7 21.1 13.2 5.3 40 

Octachlorosytrene 0.672 0.546 0.791 1.10 0.882 0.799 0.21 27 

Oxychlordane 4.21 2.31 4.02 6.72 5.01 4.45 1.6 36 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.564 0.499 0.783 0.774 0.653 0.655 0.13 19 

Mirex 0.998 0.626 0.984 2.20 1.61 1.28 0.62 48 

Cis-chlordane 0.211 0.154 0.201 0.248 0.511 0.265 0.14 53 

Cis-nonachlor 0.967 0.268 0.483 1.15 7.90 2.15 3.2 150 

Trans-nonachlor 0.118 <LOD <LOD 0.107 3.08 1.10 1.7 160 

Heptachlor epoxide 2.17 0.913 1.29 2.57 5.76 2.54 1.9 76 

86 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

2,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.0937 <LOD 

4,4,' DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.255 <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.400 <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trans-chlordane <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.0703 <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

Appendix 18. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

thick-billed murre eggs collected at St. Lazaria Island Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 9.92 8.98 9.98 9.30 8.46 9.33 0.64 6.9 

-

4,4'-DDE 144 192 112 103 139 138 35 25 

4,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.172 0.146 0.159 0.018 11 

HCB 27.1 24.3 26.6 28.6 23.7 26.1 2.1 7.9 

α-HCH 0.644 0.300 0.547 0.869 0.561 0.584 0.20 35 

β-HCH 9.44 6.00 11.1 14.0 9.24 9.96 2.9 29 

Octachlorosytrene 0.841 1.03 0.856 0.772 0.970 0.895 0.11 12 

Oxychlordane 3.40 2.60 3.19 3.81 2.76 3.15 0.49 15 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.655 0.492 0.921 1.03 0.771 0.774 0.21 28 

Mirex 1.42 1.50 1.01 1.17 1.34 1.29 0.20 15 

Cis-chlordane <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.248 0.224 0.236 0.017 7.0 

Cis-nonachlor 0.494 0.165 0.0766 0.854 0.532 0.424 0.31 74 

Trans-nonachlor <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.115 0.0768 0.0960 0.027 28 

Heptachlor epoxide 1.02 0.803 1.57 2.18 1.06 1.33 0.55 42 

87 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 19. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at the Kukpuk River delta, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1349 1351 1354 1357 1358 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 5.22 6.76 6.99 5.41 6.22 6.09 0.91 15 

2,4'-DDT <LOD 0.325 0.209 <LOD <LOD 0.267 0.083 31 

4,4,'-DDD 0.109 0.453 0.474 0.110 0.133 0.256 0.19 74 

4,4'-DDE 75.5 277 326 69.2 80.6 166 130 76 

4,4'-DDT 1.21 8.75 9.25 1.14 1.25 4.32 4.3 99 

HCB 36.2 84.6 90.0 32.3 37.4 56.1 29 51 

α-HCH 0.217 0.222 0.185 0.174 0.245 0.209 0.029 14 

β-HCH 15.2 41.0 45.8 15.2 17.0 26.8 15 57 

Octachlorosytrene 0.418 0.898 0.941 0.439 0.446 0.629 0.27 42 

Oxychlordane 18.1 72.2 79.5 17.3 19.3 41.3 32 77 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.848 2.34 1.68 0.610 0.992 1.29 0.71 55 

Mirex 3.07 8.84 9.36 2.89 3.24 5.48 3.3 60 

Cis-chlordane 0.405 1.07 1.13 0.387 0.371 0.673 0.39 58 

Cis-nonachlor 1.10 9.41 10.5 1.03 1.18 4.65 4.9 110 

Trans-chlordane 0.526 1.88 2.14 0.518 0.568 1.13 0.81 72 

Trans-nonachlor 3.55 46.5 49.6 3.32 3.92 21.4 24 110 

Heptachlor epoxide 3.82 9.37 10.5 3.60 4.27 6.31 3.3 53 

88 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

2,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.0826 <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

α-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 20. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Shishmaref Inlet Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1407 1411 1414 1415 1416 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 7.42 6.79 6.31 6.37 7.49 6.72 0.51 7.7 

4,4,'-DDD 1.31 0.501 0.573 0.713 0.328 0.685 0.38 55 

4,4'-DDE 122 163 101 148 151 137 25 18 

4,4'-DDT 3.86 4.63 1.63 7.80 4.47 4.48 2.2 49 

HCB 45.1 48.0 36.7 44.2 55.8 46.0 6.9 15 

β-HCH 16.7 19.3 16.8 16.7 23.9 18.7 3.1 17 

Octachlorosytrene 0.680 0.914 0.627 0.877 0.697 0.759 0.13 17 

Oxychlordane 15.1 22.6 24.0 23.6 17.7 20.6 4.0 19 

Pentachlorobenzene 1.36 1.66 0.715 1.21 1.93 1.38 0.46 34 

Mirex 3.19 4.02 4.04 4.09 3.48 3.77 0.41 11 

Cis-chlordane 0.420 0.803 0.567 1.68 0.356 0.766 0.54 71 

Cis-nonachlor 2.39 3.05 1.64 2.63 2.42 2.43 0.51 21 

Trans-chlordane 1.62 2.61 1.72 2.18 2.11 2.05 0.39 19 

Trans-nonachlor 4.61 7.72 6.61 6.85 5.39 6.24 1.2 20 

Heptachlor epoxide 4.26 5.50 4.45 4.71 5.68 4.92 0.64 13 

89 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

2,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

α-HCH <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

γ-HCH <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 21. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Brevig Mission Alaska, in 2009. 

Compound 1433 1435 1436 1439 1441 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 4.89 4.46 5.40 5.75 6.74 5.45 0.87 16 

4,4,'-DDD 0.0998 0.313 0.392 1.96 0.0787 0.569 0.79 140 

4,4'-DDE 165 88.7 237 286 177 191 75 39 

4,4'-DDT 0.591 3.95 2.22 3.37 0.691 2.16 1.5 70 

HCB 44.4 23.5 58.8 49.3 67.3 48.7 17 34 

β-HCH 24.3 10.2 33.4 24.9 31.2 24.8 9.1 37 

Octachlorosytrene 0.755 0.517 0.877 0.924 1.16 0.846 0.24 28 

Oxychlordane 32.0 14.5 46.1 34.1 33.3 32.0 11 35 

Pentachlorobenzene 2.38 2.22 3.68 2.66 3.74 2.94 0.73 25 

Mirex 5.48 2.31 5.42 8.22 5.83 5.45 2.1 39 

Cis-chlordane 0.362 0.518 0.563 1.73 0.305 0.696 0.59 85 

Cis-nonachlor 1.47 1.50 3.97 6.30 2.63 3.17 2.0 64 

Trans-chlordane 1.83 1.01 2.41 2.02 2.97 2.05 0.72 35 

Trans-nonachlor 3.89 2.48 11.5 37.9 5.30 12.2 15 120 

Heptachlor epoxide 8.54 3.58 12.6 11.4 10.8 9.38 3.6 38 

90 
2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LO

2,4'-DDT <LOD 0.224 0.219 0.221 2.0 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LO

α-HCH <LOQ 0.269 0.259 0.264 3.8 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LO

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LO

Appendix 22. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs River delta, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1339 1340 1340-2 1340 Mean % difference 1343 1344 1345 Mea

% Lipid 7.23 - 7.04 - - 7.45 7.22 6.32 7.24 

4,4,'-DDD 0.328 0.405 0.413 0.409 -1.9 0.105 0.419 0.231 0.29

4,4'-DDE 141 93.8 89.1 91.4 5.1 76.6 156 93.9 112 

4,4'-DDT 4.73 6.43 6.14 6.28 4.6 1.77 4.70 3.10 4.12 

HCB 36.8 26.3 26.7 26.5 -1.4 43.1 45.6 29.8 36.4 

β-HCH 12.0 8.13 7.54 7.84 7.6 24.4 18.1 8.89 14.2 

Octachlorosytrene 0.912 0.677 0.672 0.674 0.75 0.614 0.702 0.704 0.72

Oxychlordane 17.6 14.2 13.6 13.9 4.3 25.2 21.5 9.92 17.6 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.738 0.719 0.778 0.749 -8.0 0.956 0.880 0.213 0.70

Mirex 3.51 2.67 2.59 2.63 2.9 3.92 5.11 2.00 3.43 

Cis-chlordane 0.449 1.05 1.06 1.06 -1.0 0.202 0.637 0.605 0.59

Cis-nonachlor 3.12 2.45 2.39 2.42 2.3 1.41 1.97 1.66 2.12 

Trans-chlordane 1.76 1.23 1.16 1.20 5.5 0.972 1.44 1.45 1.36 

Trans-nonachlor 4.61 6.76 6.46 6.61 4.6 1.59 3.56 4.66 4.21 

Heptachlor epoxide 3.69 3.12 3.09 3.11 0.70 4.91 5.06 3.21 4.00 

91 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

α-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 23. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous 

gull eggs collected at Safety Sound, Alaska in 2008. Egg 1367 is believed to be a common eider. 

Compound 1365 1367 1368 1369 1370 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 6.07 4.95 3.88 3.27 5.44 4.54 1.2 27 

2,4'-DDT 0.157 <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.111 0.134 0.032 24 

4,4,'-DDD 0.274 0.0985 0.0709 <LOD 0.312 0.189 0.12 64 

4,4'-DDE 52.6 185 96.4 91.5 98.0 105 48 46 

4,4'-DDT 0.932 0.195 3.24 0.387 3.31 1.61 1.5 96 

HCB 34.2 65.3 37.1 40.5 31.1 41.6 14 33 

β-HCH 10.5 24.0 12.2 18.3 7.75 14.5 6.5 45 

Octachlorosytrene 0.628 1.15 0.750 0.713 0.690 0.786 0.21 26 

Oxychlordane 10.7 34.6 12.9 13.6 20.3 18.4 9.7 53 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.766 1.28 0.810 0.267 0.525 0.729 0.37 51 

Mirex 2.25 7.49 3.19 2.34 2.61 3.57 2.2 62 

Cis-chlordane 0.640 0.505 0.606 0.293 0.780 0.565 0.18 32 

Cis-nonachlor 1.64 2.46 2.25 1.39 1.89 1.93 0.44 23 

Trans-chlordane 1.27 1.52 1.63 1.16 0.887 1.29 0.30 23 

Trans-nonachlor 4.13 3.40 6.13 2.43 2.53 3.73 1.5 41 

Heptachlor epoxide 3.98 7.05 4.02 3.92 3.64 4.52 1.4 31 

92 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

α-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 24. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Bluff, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1384 1385 1388 1389 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 6.65 6.51 6.95 6.65 6.69 0.19 2.8 

2,4'-DDT 0.785 <LOD <LOD 0.0723 0.429 0.50 120 

4,4,'-DDD 0.423 <LOD <LOD 0.471 0.447 0.034 7.6 

4,4'-DDE 101 68.4 87.1 126 95.6 24 26 

4,4'-DDT 5.30 0.448 0.563 3.03 2.33 2.3 99 

HCB 34.0 29.5 35.7 43.5 35.7 5.8 16 

β-HCH 16.0 8.16 10.3 14.1 12.1 3.6 29 

Octachlorosytrene 0.589 0.684 0.855 0.672 0.700 0.11 16 

Oxychlordane 23.4 11.8 13.8 20.9 17.5 5.6 32 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.842 0.707 1.05 1.17 0.942 0.21 22 

Mirex 3.40 2.08 2.78 4.74 3.25 1.1 35 

Cis-chlordane 1.54 0.501 0.535 0.693 0.818 0.49 60 

Cis-nonachlor 2.06 1.69 2.05 2.51 2.08 0.34 16 

Trans-chlordane 1.07 1.35 1.76 1.45 1.41 0.29 20 

Trans-nonachlor 3.49 4.01 4.85 8.73 5.27 2.4 45 

Heptachlor epoxide 4.66 3.59 3.93 5.94 4.53 1.0 23 

93 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

2,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 25. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous 

gull eggs collected at Carolyn Island, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1390 1393 1394 1397 1398 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 7.65 5.53 5.20 6.84 5.35 6.30 1.1 18 

4,4,'-DDD 0.152 0.326 0.342 0.185 0.197 0.240 0.087 36 

4,4'-DDE 105 93.7 102 67.4 102 94.1 15 16 

4,4'-DDT 0.403 4.07 5.34 2.95 3.98 3.35 1.9 55 

HCB 29.1 37.9 31.9 34.5 38.2 34.3 3.9 11 

α-HCH 0.222 <LOQ <LOQ 0.219 <LOQ 0.221 0.0022 0.99 

β-HCH 8.22 13.5 9.82 11.1 12.6 11.0 2.1 19 

Octachlorosytrene 0.629 0.675 0.895 0.690 0.758 0.729 0.10 14 

Oxychlordane 17.8 12.4 14.8 10.8 21.5 15.5 4.3 28 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.454 0.988 0.196 1.02 0.306 0.592 0.39 65 

Mirex 3.95 2.41 2.51 1.72 3.06 2.73 0.83 31 

Cis-chlordane 0.611 0.995 0.909 0.630 0.694 0.768 0.17 23 

Cis-nonachlor 2.35 2.52 3.35 2.37 2.68 2.65 0.41 16 

Trans-chlordane 1.17 1.92 1.81 1.37 1.45 1.54 0.31 20 

Trans-nonachlor 3.35 8.05 6.70 5.07 4.27 5.49 1.9 34 

Heptachlor epoxide 3.69 5.01 3.49 3.91 4.54 4.13 0.63 15 

94 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

2,4'-DDT 0.0763 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 26. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous 

gull eggs collected at Cape Darby, Alaska in 2008. 

Compound 1371 1374 1377 1379 1380 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 5.65 6.04 5.30 5.33 5.84 5.58 0.34 6.2 

4,4,'-DDD 0.180 0.231 0.371 0.211 0.277 0.254 0.074 29 

4,4'-DDE 155 104 93.1 72.7 57.8 96.7 37 39 

4,4'-DDT 2.74 0.414 2.51 0.986 1.36 1.60 1.0 62 

HCB 34.0 9.5 30.5 36.4 32.7 32.6 2.8 8.4 

α-HCH 0.182 0.209 <LOQ 0.174 <LOQ 0.188 0.019 9.9 

β-HCH 11.7 8.36 10.3 11.1 10.7 10.4 1.3 12 

Octachlorosytrene 0.731 0.621 0.604 0.894 0.605 0.691 0.13 18 

Oxychlordane 20.3 17.0 13.4 10.2 9.02 14.0 4.7 34 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.640 0.458 0.571 0.656 0.679 0.601 0.089 15 

Mirex 5.24 3.37 2.58 2.02 1.58 2.96 1.4 49 

Cis-chlordane 1.01 0.769 0.458 0.497 0.407 0.629 0.26 41 

Cis-nonachlor 2.95 2.27 1.40 2.61 1.57 2.16 0.66 31 

Trans-chlordane 1.84 1.23 0.875 1.38 0.787 1.22 0.42 35 

Trans-nonachlor 7.94 3.66 1.85 4.70 1.94 4.02 2.5 62 

Heptachlor epoxide 4.57 3.95 3.61 3.50 3.34 3.79 0.49 13 

95 
2,4'-DDD <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ

2,4'-DDT <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

α-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ

γ-HCH <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ

Appendix 27. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs colAlaska in 2008. 

Compound 1401 1402 1403 1403-2 1403 Mean % difference 1404 Mean SD % Lipid 6.24 6.34 5.52 5.49 5.50 0.55 6.58 6.39 0.18 4,4,'-DDD 0.175 0.207 0.244 0.257 0.251 -5.4 0.115 0.187 0.057 4,4'-DDE 64.8 72.5 106 109 107 -3.0 149 98.5 39 4,4'-DDT 2.24 2.38 2.94 2.98 2.96 -1.5 1.04 2.15 0.81 HCB 34.6 44.5 49.0 49.8 49.4 -1.5 64.6 48.3 13 β-HCH 14.4 15.5 15.6 15.1 15.3 3.1 21.7 16.7 3.4 

Octachlorosytrene 0.699 0.768 0.881 0.894 0.888 -1.5 1.15 0.877 0.20 Oxychlordane 15.6 20.4 17.7 17.3 17.5 2.2 17.0 17.6 2.0 Pentachlorobenzene 0.801 1.07 1.17 1.12 1.14 4.4 1.66 1.17 0.36 Mirex 2.73 4.30 3.89 3.95 3.92 -1.6 4.55 3.88 0.81 Cis-chlordane 0.336 1.48 0.362 0.369 0.365 -1.9 0.508 0.671 0.54 

Cis-nonachlor 1.70 2.39 2.41 2.32 2.37 3.9 4.26 2.68 1.1 

Trans-chlordane 1.15 1.76 1.70 1.75 1.73 -3.2 3.53 2.04 1.0 Trans-nonachlor 4.36 7.56 3.76 3.82 3.79 -1.6 13.9 7.41 4.7 Heptachlor epoxide 5.05 5.24 4.89 4.86 4.88 0.56 6.34 5.38 0.66 

96 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

2,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

α-HCH <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

γ-HCH <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 28. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Shaktoolik, Alaska in 2009. 

Compound 1424 1426 1427 1428 1429 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 5.84 6.17 6.29 6.29 6.47 6.21 0.23 3.7 

4,4,'-DDD 1.10 0.108 0.146 3.28 0.496 1.03 1.3 130 

4,4'-DDE 134 91.7 90.4 158 105 116 29 25 

4,4'-DDT 3.89 0.963 1.82 0.861 1.76 1.86 1.2 65 

HCB 44.7 39.0 32.4 43.6 43.1 40.6 5.1 13 

β-HCH 18.4 15.2 11.5 4.90 15.4 13.1 5.2 40 

Octachlorosytrene 0.803 0.617 0.634 0.773 0.957 0.757 0.14 18 

Oxychlordane 26.2 24.8 12.6 35.5 22.1 24.2 8.2 34 

Pentachlorobenzene 4.57 2.40 2.89 4.28 3.23 3.47 0.93 27 

Mirex 3.19 3.25 1.82 5.09 3.28 3.33 1.2 35 

Cis-chlordane 0.618 0.269 0.294 0.482 0.457 0.424 0.14 34 

Cis-nonachlor 2.91 0.962 1.61 2.03 2.33 1.97 0.74 37 

Trans-chlordane 2.17 0.843 1.69 1.53 1.52 1.55 0.47 31 

Trans-nonachlor 14.3 1.88 3.63 5.41 3.41 5.73 5.0 87 

Heptachlor epoxide 7.27 5.89 3.90 7.90 5.66 6.13 1.6 25 

97 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

2,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

α-HCH <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

γ-HCH <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 29. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

glaucous gull eggs collected at Stuart Island, Alaska in 2009. 

Compound 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 6.87 5.62 6.35 5.38 6.40 6.12 0.61 10 

4,4,'-DDD 0.106 0.265 0.116 0.193 1.25 0.386 0.49 130 

4,4'-DDE 83.9 391 64.9 356 113 202 160 78 

4,4'-DDT 0.676 4.06 0.519 3.98 5.34 2.92 2.2 75 

HCB 10.9 39.1 8.42 37.3 41.5 27.4 16 60 

β-HCH 4.77 23.4 3.45 20.8 15.8 13.7 9.2 67 

Octachlorosytrene 0.278 0.877 0.214 0.843 0.729 0.588 0.32 54 

Oxychlordane 1.49 39.4 1.19 36.3 21.2 19.9 18 92 

Pentachlorobenzene 1.29 2.67 0.819 2.86 2.78 2.08 0.96 46 

Mirex 0.492 8.34 0.362 7.85 2.54 3.92 3.9 100 

Cis-chlordane 0.389 0.351 0.359 0.382 0.629 0.422 0.12 28 

Cis-nonachlor 0.938 3.28 0.715 2.89 2.26 2.02 1.1 57 

Trans-chlordane 0.847 2.19 0.583 1.92 2.62 1.63 0.88 54 

Trans-nonachlor 4.08 7.53 3.15 7.02 5.57 5.47 1.9 34 

Heptachlor epoxide 1.53 7.78 1.34 7.28 6.26 4.84 3.2 65 

98 
 

 

 

2,4'-DDD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

2,4'-DDT <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

 

 

 

 

α-HCH <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

γ-HCH <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 30. Lipids (%) and organochlorine pesticide mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in 

glaucous-winged gull eggs collected at Aiktak Island, Alaska in 2009. 

Compound 1473 1474 1475 1477 1478 Mean SD RSD 

% Lipid 7.03 6.20 6.51 7.32 7.17 6.85 0.47 6.8 

4,4,'-DDD 0.0886 <LOD <LOD 0.328 0.0883 0.168 0.14 82 

4,4'-DDE 17.5 324 39.8 84.4 98.4 113 120 110 

4,4'-DDT 0.125 <LOD 0.256 0.218 0.134 0.183 0.064 35 

HCB 6.38 21.6 25.4 28.0 20.4 20.3 8.4 41 

β-HCH 4.36 25.2 13.9 14.7 11.5 13.9 7.5 54 

Octachlorosytrene 0.144 0.699 0.443 0.396 0.456 0.428 0.20 46 

Oxychlordane 3.59 29.8 9.06 17.3 13.6 14.7 9.9 67 

Pentachlorobenzene 0.592 1.74 1.64 1.45 0.749 1.24 0.53 43 

Mirex 0.718 8.46 2.17 4.24 4.03 3.93 2.9 74 

Cis-chlordane 0.334 0.556 0.557 0.516 0.314 0.456 0.12 27 

Cis-nonachlor 0.803 1.51 1.92 1.11 1.03 1.28 0.44 35 

Trans-chlordane 0.141 1.60 1.00 0.571 0.946 0.851 0.54 64 

Trans-nonachlor 1.03 3.06 3.04 1.23 1.06 1.89 1.1 57 

Heptachlor epoxide 2.59 7.51 4.33 5.74 4.41 4.91 1.8 37 

99 
Appendix 31. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in unidentified murre eggs collected at Cape Lisburne, 

Alaska in 2009 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference 

value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1454 1455 1457 1458 1460 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 <LOQ 0.267 0.556 0.306 0.193 0.331 0.16 48 

BDE99 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0902 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

BDE100 <LOD 0.150 0.169 0.164 0.100 0.146 0.032 22 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB28+31 1.94 3.50 2.50 2.79 1.81 2.51 0.68 27 

PCB 29 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 44 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0336 0.0679 0.0432 0.0405 0.0463 0.0463 0.013 28 

PCB 52 0.0999 0.197 0.147 0.136 0.141 0.144 0.035 24 

PCB 56 <LOQ 0.178 0.152 0.191 0.185 0.176 0.017 9.7 

PCB 63 0.106 0.182 0.150 0.211 0.152 0.160 0.039 25 

PCB 66 1.50 2.20 1.64 2.01 1.49 1.77 0.32 18 

PCB 70 0.0494 2.07 0.0527 0.0482 0.0573 0.456 0.90 200 

PCB 74 1.04 1.76 1.23 1.59 1.13 1.35 0.31 23 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 <LOQ 0.0309 0.0291 0.0401 0.0296 0.0324 0.0052 16 

PCB 87 0.0491 0.159 0.0950 0.166 0.105 0.115 0.048 42 

PCB 92 0.0812 0.0965 0.0833 0.0915 0.0847 0.0874 0.0064 7.3 

PCB 95+121 <LOD 0.0568 0.0199 <LOD <LOD 0.0383 0.026 68 

PCB 99 1.88 7.71 3.97 4.38 3.86 4.36 2.1 48 

PCB 101 0.142 0.248 0.162 0.345 0.188 0.217 0.082 38 

PCB 105 1.32 2.03 1.33 2.05 1.33 1.61 0.39 24 

PCB 106 0.0200 0.104 0.0151 0.0367 0.0176 0.0387 0.037 97 

PCB 107 0.256 0.337 0.212 0.379 0.331 0.303 0.067 22 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 112 <LOQ 0.0161 0.0178 0.0258 0.0101 0.0175 0.0065 37 

PCB 114 0.148 0.235 0.142 0.244 0.134 0.181 0.054 30 

PCB 118 4.02 7.29 4.40 5.83 4.50 5.21 1.3 26 

PCB 119 0.0283 0.151 0.0926 0.135 0.0797 0.0974 0.049 50 

PCB 127 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 128 0.278 0.856 0.512 0.807 0.524 0.595 0.24 40 

PCB 130 0.127 0.329 0.233 0.367 0.210 0.253 0.096 38 

PCB 137 0.0592 0.257 0.169 0.187 0.158 0.166 0.071 43 

PCB 138 2.18 6.54 4.05 4.41 4.22 4.28 1.5 36 

PCB 146 1.64 3.14 1.91 2.29 1.83 2.16 0.60 28 

PCB 149 0.224 0.366 0.307 0.354 0.273 0.305 0.058 19 

100 
Appendix 31 (Continued). 

Compound 1454 1455 1457 1458 1460 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 153+132 6.12 16.2 9.57 11.4 9.48 10.6 3.7 35 

PCB 154 <LOQ 0.0924 0.0883 0.0912 0.0717 0.0859 0.0096 11 

PCB 156 0.375 0.461 0.339 0.520 0.342 0.407 0.080 20 

PCB 157 0.0934 0.139 0.0972 0.142 0.0962 0.113 0.024 22 

PCB 158 0.178 0.434 0.209 0.292 0.249 0.272 0.10 37 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 1.29 2.54 1.56 2.39 1.62 1.88 0.55 29 

PCB 165 <LOQ 0.0366 0.0340 0.0363 0.0339 0.0352 0.0015 4.1 

PCB 166 0.0342 0.0459 0.0342 0.0316 0.0370 0.0366 0.0055 15 

PCB 167 0.248 0.395 0.264 0.314 0.243 0.293 0.064 22 

PCB 170 0.689 1.20 0.782 1.03 0.686 0.877 0.23 26 

PCB 172 0.269 0.380 0.269 0.336 0.203 0.291 0.068 23 

PCB 174 <LOQ 0.0689 <LOQ 0.0652 <LOQ 0.0670 0.0026 3.8 

PCB 175 0.0614 0.117 0.0790 0.0994 0.0527 0.0818 0.026 32 

PCB 176 0.0302 0.0314 0.0312 0.0391 0.0301 0.0324 0.0038 12 

PCB 177 0.119 0.332 0.268 0.317 0.240 0.255 0.085 33 

PCB 178 0.372 0.530 0.394 0.509 0.304 0.422 0.096 23 

PCB 180+193 1.09 2.79 1.82 2.02 1.57 1.86 0.62 34 

PCB 183 0.595 0.893 0.616 0.782 0.503 0.678 0.16 23 

PCB 185 <LOQ 0.0220 <LOQ 0.0138 <LOQ 0.0179 0.0058 33 

PCB 187 1.60 4.35 2.55 3.59 2.34 2.88 1.1 38 

PCB 188 0.0321 0.0442 0.0425 0.0440 0.0301 0.0386 0.0069 18 

PCB 189 0.0397 0.0516 0.0203 0.0151 0.0358 0.0325 0.015 46 

PCB 191 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 194 0.271 0.396 0.321 0.307 0.182 0.296 0.078 26 

PCB 195 0.101 0.136 0.103 0.126 0.0700 0.107 0.025 24 

PCB 196 0.452 0.735 0.515 0.577 0.435 0.543 0.12 22 

PCB 197 0.0337 0.0556 0.0459 0.0841 0.0346 0.0508 0.021 41 

PCB 199 1.91 3.14 2.18 2.35 1.45 2.21 0.63 28 

PCB 200 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 201 0.582 1.24 0.802 0.928 0.530 0.816 0.29 35 

PCB 202 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 205 0.0350 0.0364 0.0415 0.0516 0.0278 0.0385 0.0088 23 

PCB 206 <LOQ 0.254 0.233 <LOQ <LOQ 0.244 0.015 6.0 

PCB 207 0.0492 0.0975 0.0577 0.0660 0.0531 0.0647 0.019 30 

PCB 208 0.106 0.146 0.129 0.111 0.0870 0.116 0.023 19 

PCB 209 <LOQ 0.139 0.0764 0.0731 0.0566 0.0864 0.036 42 

101 
Appendix 32. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) mass 

fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in thick-billed murre eggs collected at Little Diomede Island, 

Alaska in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value 

ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1250 1256 1257 1260 1261 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.597 0.589 0.408 0.520 0.536 0.530 0.076 14 

BDE99 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.870 <LOQ 

BDE100 0.565 0.564 0.610 0.532 0.604 0.575 0.032 5.6 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 4.25 5.12 4.02 5.09 3.28 4.35 0.77 18 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0826 0.0577 0.0569 0.0806 0.0689 0.0693 0.012 18 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0981 0.127 0.0779 0.0778 0.125 0.101 0.024 24 

PCB 52 0.244 0.252 0.118 0.131 0.219 0.193 0.064 33 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 0.250 0.241 0.238 0.257 0.194 0.236 0.025 10 

PCB 66 2.91 3.37 2.83 3.31 2.36 2.96 0.41 14 

PCB 70 0.101 0.103 0.0394 0.0498 0.111 0.0807 0.033 41 

PCB 74 2.42 2.73 2.23 2.60 2.00 2.40 0.29 12 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.00533 <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.0167 0.0110 0.0081 73 

PCB 87 0.151 0.175 0.0790 0.126 0.149 0.136 0.036 27 

PCB 92 0.0783 0.113 0.0579 0.0650 0.0847 0.0798 0.021 27 

PCB 95+121 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 99 7.28 8.14 6.19 7.29 6.17 7.01 0.83 12 

PCB 101 0.129 0.220 <LOD 0.0500 0.196 0.149 0.076 51 

PCB 105 2.00 2.55 1.97 2.46 1.73 2.14 0.35 16 

PCB 106 0.0168 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 107 0.468 0.524 0.489 0.520 0.399 0.480 0.051 11 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.224 0.292 0.243 0.272 0.224 0.251 0.030 12 

PCB 118 7.76 9.23 7.19 8.25 7.00 7.89 0.90 11 

PCB 119 0.171 0.191 0.146 0.167 0.148 0.165 0.018 11 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 1.13 1.14 0.766 0.945 0.804 0.957 0.18 18 

PCB 130 0.353 0.433 0.272 0.330 0.315 0.340 0.059 17 

PCB 137 0.365 0.372 0.261 0.296 0.309 0.321 0.047 15 

PCB 138 7.45 7.79 5.56 6.59 6.18 6.71 0.91 14 

PCB 146 3.23 3.71 3.03 3.34 3.03 3.27 0.28 8.7 

PCB 149 0.483 0.524 0.400 0.373 0.479 0.452 0.063 14 

102 
Appendix 32 (Continued). 

Compound 1250 1256 1257 1260 1261 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.0861 0.0834 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0847 0.0019 2.2 

PCB 153+132 17.0 18.7 13.7 15.2 15.4 16.0 1.9 12 

PCB 154 0.127 0.126 0.0871 0.0962 0.122 0.112 0.019 17 

PCB 156 0.575 0.749 0.599 0.619 0.536 0.615 0.081 13 

PCB 157 0.196 0.241 0.187 0.182 0.151 0.191 0.033 17 

PCB 158 0.379 0.371 0.200 0.218 0.302 0.294 0.083 28 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 2.83 3.04 2.54 2.77 2.64 2.76 0.19 7.0 

PCB 165 0.0297 0.0248 0.0287 0.0319 0.0148 0.0260 0.0068 26 

PCB 166 0.0591 0.0574 0.0599 0.0543 0.0485 0.0558 0.0047 8.3 

PCB 167 0.365 0.418 0.304 0.346 0.311 0.349 0.046 13 

PCB 170 1.12 1.35 1.11 1.18 1.11 1.18 0.10 8.8 

PCB 172 0.384 0.439 0.380 0.402 0.345 0.390 0.034 8.8 

PCB 174 0.0367 0.0665 0.0340 0.0595 0.0500 0.0493 0.014 29 

PCB 175 0.0930 0.100 0.0613 0.0795 0.0768 0.0821 0.015 18 

PCB 176 0.00649 <LOQ 0.00896 0.00890 0.00802 0.00809 0.0012 14 

PCB 177 0.278 0.288 0.171 0.207 0.261 0.241 0.050 21 

PCB 178 0.530 0.430 0.194 0.384 0.267 0.361 0.13 37 

PCB 180+193 2.87 3.17 2.35 2.61 2.81 2.76 0.31 11 

PCB 183 0.793 0.918 0.754 0.834 0.763 0.812 0.067 8.2 

PCB 185 0.0377 0.0419 0.0268 0.0423 0.0367 0.0371 0.0062 17 

PCB 187 3.53 3.80 2.77 3.14 3.21 3.29 0.39 12 

PCB 188 0.0259 0.0263 0.0194 0.0240 0.0191 0.0229 0.0035 15 

PCB 189 0.0500 0.0266 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0383 0.017 43 

PCB 191 0.0280 0.0223 0.0381 0.0369 0.0288 0.0308 0.0066 21 

PCB 194 0.336 0.409 0.340 0.380 0.296 0.352 0.044 12 

PCB 195 0.175 0.186 0.144 0.166 0.160 0.166 0.016 9.6 

PCB 196 0.898 0.859 0.773 0.862 0.811 0.841 0.049 5.8 

PCB 197 0.0652 0.0688 0.0503 0.0513 0.0440 0.0560 0.011 19 

PCB 199 3.34 3.47 3.17 3.55 3.08 3.32 0.20 5.9 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 1.34 1.08 0.922 1.23 0.932 1.10 0.18 17 

PCB 202 0.0663 0.0705 0.0639 0.0488 0.0533 0.0606 0.0091 15 

PCB 205 0.0215 0.0336 0.0259 0.0296 0.0290 0.0279 0.0045 16 

PCB 206 0.266 0.210 0.242 0.325 0.221 0.253 0.046 18 

PCB 207 0.0755 0.0857 0.0546 0.0680 0.0632 0.0694 0.012 17 

PCB 208 0.121 0.0865 0.0896 0.154 0.148 0.120 0.031 26 

PCB 209 0.134 0.115 0.125 0.185 0.140 0.140 0.027 19 

103 
Appendix 33. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) mass 

fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in common murre eggs collected at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska 

in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value ranges, 

respectively). 

Compound 1265 1266 1267 1268 1275 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.326 0.297 0.278 0.223 0.348 0.294 0.048 16 

BDE99 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

BDE100 0.579 0.495 0.538 0.542 0.585 0.548 0.037 6.7 

PCB 8 0.154 <LOD 0.0908 0.0182 0.116 0.0948 0.057 60 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 1.77 2.51 3.63 2.57 3.23 2.74 0.72 26 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0613 0.0727 0.0853 0.0604 0.0724 0.0704 0.010 14 

PCB 45 0.519 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0792 0.0723 0.0636 0.0903 0.0899 0.0791 0.011 15 

PCB 52 0.130 0.148 0.0801 0.130 0.135 0.125 0.026 21 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 66 2.27 2.77 2.47 2.16 2.29 2.39 0.24 10 

PCB 70 0.0543 0.0662 0.0292 0.0664 0.0560 0.0544 0.015 28 

PCB 74 1.87 2.25 2.01 1.82 1.85 1.96 0.18 9.0 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 87 0.0454 0.108 0.0766 0.0665 0.0526 0.0698 0.024 35 

PCB 92 0.0485 0.0642 0.0375 0.0435 0.0589 0.0505 0.011 22 

PCB 95+121 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 99 4.59 5.79 5.00 4.49 4.18 4.81 0.62 13 

PCB 101 <LOD 0.0397 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 105 1.63 2.34 1.59 1.34 1.44 1.67 0.39 24 

PCB 106 0.0124 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0128 0.0125 0.0126 0.00021 1.7 

PCB 107 0.219 0.371 0.341 0.232 0.296 0.292 0.066 23 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.181 0.260 0.175 0.181 0.174 0.194 0.037 19 

PCB 118 6.36 8.44 5.71 5.61 5.23 6.27 1.3 20 

PCB 119 0.109 0.140 0.108 0.108 0.0925 0.111 0.017 15 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 0.679 0.795 0.645 0.611 0.551 0.656 0.091 14 

PCB 130 0.328 0.324 0.231 0.363 0.188 0.287 0.074 26 

PCB 137 0.248 0.343 0.207 0.253 0.189 0.248 0.060 24 

PCB 138 4.62 6.27 4.15 4.15 3.80 4.60 0.98 21 

PCB 146 2.06 2.85 2.33 2.18 2.18 2.32 0.31 13 

PCB 149 0.326 0.373 0.325 0.314 0.351 0.338 0.024 7.1 

104 
Appendix 33 (Continued). 

Compound 1265 1266 1267 1268 1275 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.0784 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 153+132 10.2 13.9 9.99 10.6 9.30 10.8 1.8 17 

PCB 154 0.100 0.0918 0.0714 0.0927 0.0847 0.0882 0.011 12 

PCB 156 0.508 0.664 0.472 0.430 0.446 0.504 0.094 19 

PCB 157 0.158 0.182 0.141 0.123 0.124 0.146 0.025 17 

PCB 158 0.176 0.360 0.271 0.229 0.188 0.245 0.074 30 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 1.84 2.33 1.75 1.81 1.68 1.88 0.26 14 

PCB 165 0.0259 0.0359 0.0228 0.0268 0.0174 0.0258 0.0068 26 

PCB 166 0.0374 0.0471 0.0410 0.0358 0.0511 0.0425 0.0065 15 

PCB 167 0.241 0.401 0.222 0.220 0.212 0.259 0.080 31 

PCB 170 0.787 1.09 0.739 0.789 0.782 0.837 0.14 17 

PCB 172 0.279 0.383 0.282 0.281 0.324 0.310 0.045 14 

PCB 174 0.0399 0.0410 0.0477 0.0376 0.0344 0.0401 0.0049 12 

PCB 175 0.0358 0.0844 0.0519 0.0526 0.0566 0.0563 0.018 31 

PCB 176 <LOQ <LOQ 0.00496 0.0106 <LOQ 0.00777 0.0040 51 

PCB 177 0.157 0.203 0.137 0.162 0.125 0.157 0.030 19 

PCB 178 0.145 0.279 0.183 0.159 0.119 0.177 0.062 35 

PCB 180+193 1.87 2.58 1.68 1.95 1.77 1.97 0.35 18 

PCB 183 0.394 0.617 0.517 0.393 0.500 0.484 0.094 19 

PCB 185 0.0180 0.0128 0.0176 0.0179 0.0169 0.0166 0.0022 13 

PCB 187 1.41 2.74 1.69 1.74 1.69 1.85 0.51 28 

PCB 188 0.00784 0.0314 0.0197 0.0151 0.0200 0.0188 0.0086 46 

PCB 189 <LOQ 0.0211 0.0548 0.0627 0.0574 0.0490 0.019 39 

PCB 191 0.0258 0.0195 0.0177 0.0229 0.0255 0.0223 0.0036 16 

PCB 194 0.133 0.220 0.218 0.143 0.251 0.193 0.052 27 

PCB 195 0.108 0.119 0.140 0.121 0.134 0.124 0.013 10 

PCB 196 0.612 0.699 0.683 0.652 0.751 0.679 0.052 7.6 

PCB 197 0.0483 0.0408 0.0547 0.0469 0.0557 0.0493 0.0061 12 

PCB 199 1.91 2.68 2.71 2.49 2.83 2.52 0.37 15 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 0.491 0.614 0.835 0.847 0.806 0.719 0.16 22 

PCB 202 0.0388 0.0620 <LOQ 0.0548 0.0405 0.0490 0.011 23 

PCB 205 0.0216 0.0185 0.0258 0.0307 0.0316 0.0256 0.0057 22 

PCB 206 0.170 0.364 0.199 0.321 0.216 0.254 0.084 33 

PCB 207 0.0508 0.0611 0.0631 0.0898 0.0718 0.0673 0.015 22 

PCB 208 0.111 0.203 0.164 0.208 0.130 0.163 0.043 26 

PCB 209 0.106 0.151 0.138 0.182 0.183 0.152 0.032 21 

105 
Appendix 34. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) mass 

fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in thick-billed murre eggs collected at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska 

in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value ranges, 

respectively). 

Compound 1278 1279 1281 1284 1287 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.501 0.174 0.282 0.187 0.549 0.339 0.18 52 

BDE99 0.875 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.929 0.902 0.038 4.2 

BDE100 0.513 0.511 0.460 0.585 0.746 0.563 0.11 20 

PCB 8 0.0344 <LOD 0.0400 <LOD <LOD 0.0372 0.0039 11 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 3.73 3.15 2.65 3.33 3.34 3.24 0.39 12 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0548 0.0489 0.0541 0.0549 0.0592 0.0544 0.0037 6.7 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0617 0.0586 0.0538 0.0734 0.0827 0.0661 0.012 18 

PCB 52 0.0909 0.0821 0.0668 0.0876 0.118 0.0891 0.019 21 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 0.213 <LOQ <LOQ 0.191 <LOQ 0.202 0.016 7.7 

PCB 66 2.63 2.29 1.87 2.60 2.56 2.39 0.32 13 

PCB 70 0.0298 0.0335 0.0161 0.0271 0.0511 0.0315 0.013 40 

PCB 74 2.24 1.90 1.50 2.14 2.20 2.00 0.31 15 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 87 0.0935 0.0408 0.0296 0.0767 0.0797 0.0641 0.027 43 

PCB 92 0.0371 0.0333 0.0450 0.0645 0.0636 0.0487 0.015 30 

PCB 95+121 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 99 6.17 4.36 3.97 5.81 5.43 5.15 0.94 18 

PCB 101 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 105 1.78 1.65 1.22 1.97 1.36 1.60 0.30 19 

PCB 106 0.00986 0.0264 0.0298 <LOQ 0.00971 0.0189 0.011 56 

PCB 107 0.363 0.308 0.288 0.358 0.332 0.330 0.032 9.7 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.220 0.183 0.145 0.225 0.183 0.191 0.033 17 

PCB 118 6.81 5.49 4.59 7.13 6.08 6.02 1.0 17 

PCB 119 0.156 0.0828 0.0896 0.117 0.134 0.116 0.030 26 

PCB 127 2.18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 0.818 0.593 0.506 0.804 0.824 0.709 0.15 21 

PCB 130 0.334 0.221 0.170 0.304 0.334 0.273 0.073 27 

PCB 137 0.295 0.192 0.142 0.245 0.308 0.236 0.070 30 

PCB 138 5.74 4.13 3.29 5.32 5.56 4.81 1.1 22 

PCB 146 2.60 2.32 1.83 3.01 2.54 2.46 0.43 18 

PCB 149 0.359 0.297 0.256 0.331 0.368 0.322 0.046 14 

106 
Appendix 34 (Continued). 

Compound 1278 1279 1281 1284 1287 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 153+132 13.0 10.2 7.97 13.4 13.0 11.5 2.3 20 

PCB 154 0.106 0.0703 0.0741 0.0775 0.117 0.0890 0.021 24 

PCB 156 0.493 0.432 0.385 0.572 0.444 0.465 0.071 15 

PCB 157 0.138 0.124 0.114 0.175 0.130 0.136 0.024 17 

PCB 158 0.254 0.126 0.133 0.207 0.242 0.192 0.060 31 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 2.16 1.73 1.42 2.39 2.27 1.99 0.41 20 

PCB 165 0.0164 0.0263 0.0274 0.0253 0.0133 0.0217 0.0064 29 

PCB 166 0.0405 0.0439 0.0470 0.0529 0.0381 0.0445 0.0058 13 

PCB 167 0.268 0.252 0.168 0.296 0.246 0.246 0.048 19 

PCB 170 0.846 0.718 0.582 0.904 0.856 0.781 0.13 17 

PCB 172 0.292 0.315 0.197 0.313 0.285 0.281 0.048 17 

PCB 174 0.0303 0.0311 0.0324 0.0454 0.0401 0.0358 0.0066 18 

PCB 175 0.0712 0.0625 0.0406 0.0714 0.0668 0.0625 0.013 20 

PCB 176 0.00714 0.00913 0.0118 0.00763 0.00537 0.00821 0.0024 29 

PCB 177 0.272 0.126 0.118 0.203 0.299 0.204 0.082 40 

PCB 178 0.278 0.136 0.122 0.299 0.220 0.211 0.081 38 

PCB 180+193 2.26 1.70 1.35 2.20 2.44 1.99 0.45 23 

PCB 183 0.571 0.562 0.373 0.627 0.510 0.529 0.096 18 

PCB 185 0.0323 0.0263 0.0210 0.0253 0.0296 0.0269 0.0043 16 

PCB 187 2.45 2.28 1.41 2.89 2.63 2.33 0.56 24 

PCB 188 0.0214 0.0245 0.0189 0.0131 0.0147 0.0185 0.0047 25 

PCB 189 0.0606 0.0518 0.0199 0.0636 0.0607 0.0513 0.018 35 

PCB 191 0.0301 0.0221 0.0187 0.0170 0.0354 0.0247 0.0078 32 

PCB 194 0.182 0.162 0.155 0.268 0.232 0.200 0.049 24 

PCB 195 0.0823 0.0983 0.0763 0.121 0.110 0.0976 0.019 19 

PCB 196 0.698 0.687 0.610 0.787 0.734 0.703 0.065 9.2 

PCB 197 0.0617 0.0680 0.0336 0.0510 0.0648 0.0558 0.014 25 

PCB 199 2.56 2.60 2.06 3.15 2.72 2.62 0.39 15 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 0.747 0.896 0.648 1.12 0.786 0.839 0.18 21 

PCB 202 0.0530 0.0420 0.0504 0.0368 0.0378 0.0440 0.0073 17 

PCB 205 0.0320 0.0492 0.0426 0.0248 0.0475 0.0392 0.010 27 

PCB 206 0.183 0.178 0.314 0.174 0.356 0.241 0.087 36 

PCB 207 0.0582 0.0615 0.0510 0.0824 0.0660 0.0638 0.012 18 

PCB 208 0.0855 0.119 0.166 0.105 0.171 0.129 0.038 29 

PCB 209 0.102 0.133 0.0873 0.230 0.118 0.134 0.056 42 

107 
Appendix 35. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in common murre eggs collected at Sledge Island, 

Alaska in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference 

value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1292 1295 1301 1303 1305 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.739 0.839 0.753 0.665 1.10 0.819 0.17 20 

BDE99 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.988 1.25 1.12 0.18 17 

BDE100 0.600 0.601 0.635 0.679 0.845 0.672 0.10 15 

PCB 8 <LOD 0.0401 0.0316 0.0955 0.0945 0.0654 0.034 52 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD 0.0103 <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 2.21 3.02 2.37 3.10 4.06 2.95 0.73 25 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0622 0.0643 0.110 0.0989 0.0633 0.0797 0.023 29 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0683 <LOQ 0.0645 0.0664 0.0027 4.0 

PCB 49 0.0892 0.0726 0.138 0.163 0.351 0.163 0.11 68 

PCB 52 0.188 0.105 0.234 0.284 0.318 0.226 0.084 37 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0229 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 <LOQ <LOQ 0.201 <LOQ 0.227 0.214 0.018 8.4 

PCB 66 1.88 2.58 2.07 2.28 2.98 2.36 0.43 18 

PCB 70 0.0894 0.0478 0.147 0.159 0.198 0.128 0.060 46 

PCB 74 1.57 2.08 1.66 1.90 2.66 1.98 0.43 22 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 <LOD <LOD 0.0580 0.00375 0.0162 0.0260 0.028 110 

PCB 87 0.0700 0.0451 0.113 0.137 0.361 0.145 0.13 87 

PCB 92 0.0657 0.0434 0.132 0.101 0.103 0.0891 0.035 39 

PCB 95+121 <LOD <LOD 0.0709 <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 99 3.64 5.56 3.69 4.88 8.51 5.26 2.0 38 

PCB 101 0.0700 <LOD 0.146 0.199 2.13 0.635 1.0 160 

PCB 105 1.10 2.01 1.30 1.36 2.03 1.56 0.43 28 

PCB 106 0.0254 0.0239 0.0681 0.0310 0.0125 0.0322 0.021 66 

PCB 107 0.233 0.305 0.366 0.236 0.468 0.321 0.099 31 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.672 <LOD 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD 0.0528 <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.154 0.230 0.224 0.188 0.263 0.212 0.042 20 

PCB 118 4.54 7.13 4.88 5.57 8.85 6.20 1.8 29 

PCB 119 0.0956 0.113 0.124 0.123 0.244 0.140 0.059 42 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 0.626 0.919 0.641 0.757 1.56 0.901 0.39 43 

PCB 130 0.200 0.268 0.322 0.299 0.837 0.385 0.26 67 

PCB 137 0.249 0.287 0.265 0.271 0.659 0.346 0.18 51 

PCB 138 4.38 6.27 4.11 4.97 10.1 5.97 2.5 41 

PCB 146 2.02 2.97 2.10 2.42 3.73 2.65 0.71 27 

PCB 149 0.361 0.309 0.401 0.497 1.34 0.582 0.43 74 

108 
Appendix 35 (Continued). 

Compound 1292 1295 1301 1303 1305 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.0781 0.0763 0.126 0.0898 0.102 0.0946 0.021 22 

PCB 153+132 10.3 14.8 9.97 12.4 23.8 14.3 5.7 40 

PCB 154 0.102 0.0955 0.154 0.126 0.387 0.173 0.12 70 

PCB 156 0.383 0.615 0.471 0.421 0.620 0.502 0.11 22 

PCB 157 0.121 0.175 0.195 0.141 0.197 0.166 0.034 20 

PCB 158 0.236 0.398 0.350 0.343 0.904 0.446 0.26 59 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0570 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 1.66 2.17 1.83 1.98 3.13 2.15 0.58 27 

PCB 165 0.0208 0.0213 0.0574 0.0144 0.0366 0.0301 0.017 58 

PCB 166 0.0397 0.0496 0.135 0.0388 0.0776 0.0681 0.041 60 

PCB 167 0.192 0.325 0.335 0.241 0.428 0.304 0.091 30 

PCB 170 0.888 1.07 0.888 0.931 1.65 1.09 0.33 30 

PCB 172 0.251 0.314 0.345 0.318 0.432 0.332 0.066 20 

PCB 174 0.0431 0.0539 0.103 0.0686 0.122 0.0781 0.033 43 

PCB 175 0.0635 0.0872 0.150 0.0753 0.140 0.103 0.039 38 

PCB 176 0.0167 0.0138 0.0869 0.0151 0.0221 0.0309 0.031 100 

PCB 177 0.206 0.155 0.203 0.266 0.970 0.360 0.34 95 

PCB 178 0.191 0.370 0.207 0.216 0.695 0.336 0.21 63 

PCB 180+193 2.15 2.64 2.14 2.40 4.57 2.78 1.0 37 

PCB 183 0.526 0.706 0.583 0.591 1.79 0.839 0.53 64 

PCB 185 0.0273 0.0175 0.0905 0.0229 0.0488 0.0414 0.030 72 

PCB 187 1.93 2.78 1.91 2.48 5.65 2.95 1.6 53 

PCB 188 0.0141 0.0289 0.0738 0.0171 0.0347 0.0337 0.024 71 

PCB 189 0.0458 <LOQ 0.108 0.0200 0.0205 0.0486 0.041 85 

PCB 191 0.0135 0.0381 0.0544 0.0197 0.0521 0.0355 0.019 52 

PCB 194 0.225 0.339 0.353 0.237 0.409 0.312 0.079 25 

PCB 195 0.147 0.159 0.227 0.132 0.211 0.175 0.042 24 

PCB 196 0.715 0.863 0.790 0.826 1.00 0.839 0.11 13 

PCB 197 0.0409 0.0531 0.121 0.0579 0.0698 0.0686 0.031 46 

PCB 199 2.41 3.29 2.69 2.92 3.64 2.99 0.49 16 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD 0.00357 <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 0.899 1.08 1.39 0.924 1.19 1.10 0.20 19 

PCB 202 <LOQ 0.0608 0.104 0.0587 0.217 0.110 0.074 67 

PCB 205 0.0104 0.0605 0.0927 0.0232 0.0488 0.0471 0.032 69 

PCB 206 0.121 0.436 0.321 0.285 0.385 0.310 0.12 39 

PCB 207 0.0378 0.0685 0.0866 0.0490 0.0874 0.0659 0.022 34 

PCB 208 0.0620 0.137 0.122 0.140 0.184 0.129 0.044 34 

PCB 209 0.0938 0.160 0.196 0.110 0.196 0.151 0.048 32 

109 
Appendix 36. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) mass 

fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in common murre eggs collected at Bluff, Alaska in 2008 

(compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value ranges, 

respectively). 

Compound 1307 1309 1314 1319 1320 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.801 0.641 0.357 0.676 1.05 0.704 0.25 36 

BDE99 1.06 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.935 0.998 0.089 8.9 

BDE100 0.818 0.570 0.538 0.595 0.740 0.652 0.12 19 

PCB 8 <LOD 0.0445 0.0310 0.0625 0.0313 0.0423 0.015 35 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 4.20 2.52 2.66 2.27 2.64 2.86 0.76 27 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0553 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0455 0.0461 0.0490 0.0055 11 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0294 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0848 0.207 0.0617 0.0696 0.0848 0.102 0.060 59 

PCB 52 0.0929 0.120 0.0564 0.102 0.0801 0.0903 0.024 27 

PCB 56 1.10 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 0.230 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 66 3.27 1.93 2.35 1.72 2.10 2.27 0.60 27 

PCB 70 0.0132 0.103 0.0265 0.0438 0.0269 0.0427 0.035 83 

PCB 74 2.70 1.66 1.87 1.43 1.82 1.90 0.48 25 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 <LOD 0.00448 0.00513 <LOD <LOD 0.00480 0.00046 9.6 

PCB 87 0.141 0.244 0.0476 0.0877 0.105 0.125 0.074 59 

PCB 92 0.0423 0.0511 0.0468 0.0798 0.0588 0.0558 0.015 26 

PCB 95+121 0.0247 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 99 8.73 5.18 4.96 4.04 5.38 5.66 1.8 32 

PCB 101 0.0383 1.52 <LOD 0.0843 0.0612 0.426 0.73 170 

PCB 105 2.47 1.18 1.83 0.964 1.21 1.53 0.62 40 

PCB 106 0.0417 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 107 0.519 0.272 0.338 0.262 0.376 0.353 0.10 29 

PCB 110 <LOD 0.123 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.262 0.150 0.246 0.141 0.171 0.194 0.056 29 

PCB 118 9.77 5.36 6.57 4.47 5.63 6.36 2.0 32 

PCB 119 0.221 0.145 0.0966 0.107 0.136 0.141 0.049 35 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 1.44 0.972 0.812 0.713 0.902 0.968 0.28 29 

PCB 130 0.570 0.459 0.241 0.260 0.376 0.381 0.14 36 

PCB 137 0.455 0.402 0.240 0.231 0.339 0.333 0.098 30 

PCB 138 9.81 6.51 5.33 4.28 6.01 6.39 2.1 33 

PCB 146 4.45 2.33 3.00 2.03 2.50 2.86 0.96 33 

PCB 149 0.417 0.755 0.289 0.388 0.377 0.445 0.18 40 

110 
Appendix 36 (Continued). 

Compound 1307 1309 1314 1319 1320 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.0971 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0781 <LOQ 0.0876 0.013 15 

PCB 153+132 23.9 15.1 13.9 10.8 14.8 15.7 4.9 31 

PCB 154 0.158 0.256 0.0966 0.108 0.144 0.153 0.063 41 

PCB 156 0.816 0.373 0.658 0.401 0.444 0.538 0.19 36 

PCB 157 0.271 0.105 0.180 0.117 0.128 0.160 0.068 43 

PCB 158 0.429 0.564 0.164 0.280 0.319 0.351 0.15 43 

PCB 159 0.0136 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 3.67 2.06 2.42 1.73 2.35 2.45 0.74 30 

PCB 165 0.0339 0.0190 0.0286 0.0196 0.0206 0.0243 0.0066 27 

PCB 166 0.0815 0.0468 0.0655 0.0374 0.0379 0.0538 0.019 36 

PCB 167 0.499 0.256 0.336 0.192 0.251 0.307 0.12 39 

PCB 170 1.88 0.999 1.27 0.974 1.07 1.24 0.38 30 

PCB 172 0.533 0.254 0.419 0.274 0.309 0.358 0.12 33 

PCB 174 0.0951 0.126 0.0694 0.0463 0.0443 0.0762 0.034 45 

PCB 175 0.0958 0.105 0.0839 0.0637 0.0830 0.0862 0.015 18 

PCB 176 <LOQ 0.0101 0.0129 0.0102 <LOQ 0.0111 0.0016 14 

PCB 177 0.449 0.644 0.152 0.235 0.380 0.372 0.19 52 

PCB 178 0.427 0.295 0.284 0.223 0.343 0.314 0.076 24 

PCB 180+193 4.34 2.96 2.66 2.32 2.95 3.05 0.77 25 

PCB 183 1.17 1.08 0.814 0.571 0.698 0.867 0.25 29 

PCB 185 0.0347 0.0432 0.0274 0.0334 0.0457 0.0369 0.0075 20 

PCB 187 5.14 3.17 2.83 2.10 2.82 3.21 1.1 36 

PCB 188 0.0460 0.0116 0.0267 0.0206 0.0178 0.0245 0.013 54 

PCB 189 0.0266 <LOQ 0.0713 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0490 0.032 64 

PCB 191 0.0534 0.0405 0.0328 0.0246 0.0213 0.0345 0.013 37 

PCB 194 0.627 0.242 0.507 0.296 0.293 0.393 0.17 42 

PCB 195 0.283 0.104 0.225 0.151 0.148 0.182 0.071 39 

PCB 196 1.28 0.666 0.969 0.730 0.844 0.897 0.24 27 

PCB 197 0.135 0.0572 0.0808 0.0784 0.0807 0.0864 0.029 33 

PCB 199 5.14 2.32 4.01 2.56 3.09 3.43 1.2 34 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 1.73 0.693 1.26 1.01 1.01 1.14 0.38 34 

PCB 202 0.0826 0.0966 0.0630 0.0639 0.0837 0.0780 0.014 18 

PCB 205 0.0485 0.0147 0.0281 0.0313 0.0344 0.0314 0.012 39 

PCB 206 0.370 0.197 0.361 0.179 0.767 0.375 0.24 63 

PCB 207 0.143 0.0498 0.116 0.0599 0.0642 0.0866 0.041 47 

PCB 208 0.187 0.116 0.127 0.0427 0.0806 0.111 0.054 49 

PCB 209 0.262 0.106 0.200 0.0923 0.135 0.159 0.071 45 

111 
Appendix 37. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in common murre eggs collected at Cape Denbigh, 

Alaska in 2009 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference 

value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1443 1446 1448 1449 1452 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.726 0.458 0.524 0.320 0.580 0.522 0.15 29 

BDE99 0.141 <LOQ 0.0993 <LOQ 0.163 0.134 0.032 24 

BDE100 0.210 0.165 0.190 0.124 0.240 0.186 0.044 24 

PCB 8 <LOD 0.00688 0.0375 0.0147 <LOD 0.0197 0.016 81 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB28+31 1.27 1.60 2.07 1.70 1.74 1.67 0.29 17 

PCB 29 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 44 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0661 0.0500 0.0700 0.0455 0.0429 0.0549 0.012 23 

PCB 52 0.154 0.149 0.196 0.125 0.196 0.164 0.031 19 

PCB 56 0.151 0.180 0.196 0.197 0.177 0.180 0.019 10 

PCB 63 0.0796 0.0992 0.125 0.0680 0.109 0.0962 0.023 24 

PCB 66 1.00 1.29 1.46 1.45 1.29 1.30 0.19 14 

PCB 70 0.0708 0.0663 0.0735 0.0509 0.0694 0.0662 0.0089 13 

PCB 74 0.791 0.920 1.13 1.01 1.14 0.999 0.15 15 

PCB 79 0.0254 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0287 0.0370 0.0304 0.006 20 

PCB 82 0.0303 0.0353 0.0300 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0319 0.0029 9.3 

PCB 87 0.0256 0.0637 0.110 0.0228 0.0832 0.0611 0.037 61 

PCB 92 0.0936 0.0897 0.114 0.0886 0.0859 0.0943 0.011 12 

PCB 95+121 <LOD <LOD 0.0243 <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 99 2.75 2.74 4.32 3.03 3.97 3.36 0.73 22 

PCB 101 0.227 0.197 0.287 0.155 0.263 0.226 0.052 23 

PCB 105 0.849 0.974 1.22 1.31 1.11 1.09 0.18 17 

PCB 106 0.0206 0.0167 0.0211 0.0272 0.0173 0.0206 0.0042 20 

PCB 107 0.153 0.176 0.241 0.148 0.198 0.183 0.038 21 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 112 0.00984 0.0105 0.0130 0.00982 0.0157 0.0118 0.0025 22 

PCB 114 0.0904 0.109 0.131 0.131 0.113 0.115 0.017 15 

PCB 118 3.01 3.25 4.52 3.80 4.09 3.74 0.62 16 

PCB 119 0.0643 0.0598 0.105 0.0613 0.106 0.0792 0.024 30 

PCB 127 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 128 0.460 0.419 0.658 0.423 0.702 0.532 0.14 26 

PCB 130 0.144 0.156 0.228 0.129 0.249 0.181 0.054 30 

PCB 137 0.153 0.121 0.228 0.133 0.256 0.178 0.060 34 

PCB 138 3.46 3.27 4.80 3.39 4.93 3.97 0.82 21 

PCB 146 1.21 1.39 1.78 1.58 1.69 1.53 0.23 15 

PCB 149 0.247 0.267 0.316 0.238 0.298 0.273 0.033 12 

112 
Appendix 37 (Continued). 

Compound 1443 1446 1448 1449 1452 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 <LOQ 0.0142 0.0204 <LOQ 0.0225 0.0190 0.0043 22 

PCB 153+132 7.68 7.43 11.2 7.74 11.0 9.01 1.9 21 

PCB 154 0.0842 0.0700 0.0930 0.0682 0.113 0.0856 0.018 21 

PCB 156 0.246 0.274 0.301 0.343 0.336 0.300 0.041 14 

PCB 157 0.0805 0.0883 0.0939 0.105 0.100 0.0936 0.0097 10 

PCB 158 0.135 0.181 0.326 0.165 0.176 0.197 0.075 38 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 1.02 1.19 1.51 1.13 1.48 1.27 0.22 17 

PCB 165 <LOQ 0.0369 0.0341 0.0372 <LOQ 0.0361 0.0017 4.6 

PCB 166 0.0293 0.0280 0.0311 0.0338 0.0296 0.0304 0.0022 7.3 

PCB 167 0.206 0.210 0.262 0.258 0.244 0.236 0.026 11 

PCB 170 0.669 0.674 0.810 0.713 0.895 0.752 0.098 13 

PCB 172 0.155 0.213 0.209 0.234 0.202 0.203 0.029 14 

PCB 174 0.0698 0.0630 0.0714 0.0696 0.0667 0.0681 0.0033 4.9 

PCB 175 0.0528 0.0580 0.0703 0.0645 0.0709 0.0633 0.0078 12 

PCB 176 0.0320 0.0305 0.0333 0.0326 0.0312 0.0319 0.0011 3.5 

PCB 177 0.199 0.177 0.275 0.140 0.305 0.219 0.069 32 

PCB 178 0.295 0.281 0.445 0.242 0.317 0.316 0.077 24 

PCB 180+193 1.63 1.52 2.10 1.53 2.32 1.82 0.37 20 

PCB 183 0.473 0.530 0.606 0.582 0.603 0.559 0.057 10 

PCB 185 0.0164 0.0152 0.0173 <LOQ 0.0186 0.0169 0.0015 8.6 

PCB 187 1.51 1.73 2.44 1.71 2.21 1.92 0.39 20 

PCB 188 0.0261 0.0269 0.0278 0.0355 0.0271 0.0287 0.0039 13 

PCB 189 0.0313 0.0314 0.0405 0.0520 0.0491 0.0409 0.0097 24 

PCB 191 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 194 0.245 0.257 0.266 0.262 0.295 0.265 0.019 7.0 

PCB 195 0.0949 0.0811 0.0980 0.106 0.109 0.0979 0.011 11 

PCB 196 0.430 0.415 0.468 0.525 0.528 0.473 0.052 11 

PCB 197 0.0378 0.0376 0.0487 0.0349 0.0453 0.0409 0.0059 14 

PCB 199 1.18 1.49 1.45 1.77 1.61 1.50 0.22 14 

PCB 200 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 201 0.489 0.588 0.820 0.709 0.608 0.643 0.13 20 

PCB 202 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 205 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 206 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 207 0.0553 0.0601 0.0669 0.0640 0.0639 0.0620 0.0045 7.2 

PCB 208 0.0941 0.102 0.113 0.120 0.105 0.107 0.0099 9.2 

PCB 209 0.0733 0.0756 0.115 0.118 0.0830 0.0930 0.022 24 

113 
Appendix 38. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) mass 

fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in common murre eggs collected at St. Paul Island, Alaska in 

2009 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value ranges, 

respectively). 

Compound 1479 1480 1482 1485 1486 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.313 0.0809 0.101 0.358 0.184 0.207 0.12 60 

BDE99 0.0847 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0722 <LOQ 0.0785 0.0088 11 

BDE100 0.152 0.106 <LOD 0.162 0.0977 0.129 0.032 25 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB28+31 1.85 2.17 1.41 2.38 1.41 1.84 0.44 24 

PCB 29 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 44 0.0698 <LOQ 0.0563 0.0850 <LOQ 0.0704 0.014 20 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0405 <LOQ 0.0306 0.0802 0.0362 0.0469 0.023 48 

PCB 52 0.131 0.0936 0.106 0.222 0.112 0.133 0.052 39 

PCB 56 0.234 0.163 0.158 0.197 0.173 0.185 0.031 17 

PCB 63 0.124 0.139 0.0982 0.156 0.117 0.127 0.022 17 

PCB 66 1.55 1.70 1.01 1.65 1.26 1.43 0.29 21 

PCB 70 0.0551 <LOQ 0.0492 0.103 0.0495 0.0641 0.026 40 

PCB 74 1.19 1.20 0.670 1.26 0.908 1.05 0.25 24 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.0337 0.0367 0.0319 0.0314 0.0337 0.0335 0.0021 6.2 

PCB 87 0.0679 0.0343 0.0270 0.0972 0.0173 0.0488 0.033 68 

PCB 92 0.0910 <LOQ 0.0826 0.116 <LOQ 0.0964 0.017 18 

PCB 95+121 <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.0332 0.0195 0.0263 0.0097 37 

PCB 99 3.38 1.55 0.632 4.10 2.27 2.39 1.4 58 

PCB 101 0.166 <LOQ 0.145 0.298 0.146 0.189 0.074 39 

PCB 105 1.35 1.49 0.839 1.25 1.01 1.19 0.26 22 

PCB 106 0.0178 0.0155 0.0154 0.0167 0.0153 0.0161 0.0011 6.6 

PCB 107 0.227 0.274 0.183 0.236 0.231 0.230 0.032 14 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 112 0.00848 <LOQ <LOQ 0.00933 0.00671 0.00818 0.0013 16 

PCB 114 0.143 0.182 0.115 0.138 0.114 0.138 0.028 20 

PCB 118 4.77 4.57 2.65 4.33 3.31 3.92 0.91 23 

PCB 119 0.0769 0.0208 0.0180 0.105 0.0436 0.0529 0.038 71 

PCB 127 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 128 0.521 0.227 0.155 0.581 0.308 0.359 0.19 52 

PCB 130 0.203 0.122 0.0830 0.239 0.104 0.150 0.067 45 

PCB 137 0.178 0.0486 0.0457 0.188 0.0986 0.112 0.068 61 

PCB 138 4.05 1.79 1.09 4.31 2.45 2.74 1.4 51 

PCB 146 1.70 1.59 0.960 1.73 1.18 1.43 0.34 24 

PCB 149 0.256 0.191 0.186 0.311 0.207 0.230 0.053 23 

114 
s 

Appendix 38 (Continued). 

Compound 1479 1480 1482 1485 1486 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 153+132 8.79 4.80 2.76 9.53 5.38 6.25 2.8 45 

PCB 154 0.0774 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0878 0.0600 0.0751 0.014 19 

PCB 156 0.348 0.434 0.267 0.263 0.266 0.316 0.075 24 

PCB 157 0.0974 0.100 0.0723 0.0910 0.0752 0.0873 0.013 15 

PCB 158 0.225 0.129 0.0693 0.176 0.120 0.144 0.059 41 

PCB 159 <LOQ 0.00400 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 1.36 1.31 0.725 1.45 0.914 1.15 0.32 27 

PCB 165 0.0325 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 166 0.0289 0.0454 0.0278 0.0439 0.0299 0.0352 0.0087 25 

PCB 167 0.284 0.285 0.171 0.266 0.193 0.240 0.054 22 

PCB 170 0.589 0.706 0.453 0.673 0.471 0.578 0.11 20 

PCB 172 0.228 0.292 0.200 0.196 0.169 0.217 0.047 22 

PCB 174 0.0953 0.0818 0.0736 0.0752 0.0782 0.0808 0.0087 11 

PCB 175 0.0525 0.0680 0.0565 0.0811 0.0442 0.0605 0.014 24 

PCB 176 0.0347 <LOQ 0.0318 0.0368 <LOQ 0.0344 0.0025 7.4 

PCB 177 0.212 0.116 0.111 0.269 0.133 0.168 0.069 41 

PCB 178 0.279 0.323 0.251 0.393 0.197 0.289 0.074 26 

PCB 180+193 1.90 1.11 0.719 1.75 1.13 1.32 0.49 37 

PCB 183 0.462 0.545 0.360 0.518 0.360 0.449 0.086 19 

PCB 185 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0199 0.0147 <LOQ 0.0173 0.0037 21 

PCB 187 1.88 1.64 0.680 2.32 1.20 1.54 0.63 41 

PCB 188 0.0277 0.0269 0.0210 0.0364 0.0247 0.0274 0.0057 21 

PCB 189 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 191 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 194 0.250 0.296 0.273 0.206 0.170 0.239 0.051 21 

PCB 195 0.0945 0.103 0.0712 0.103 0.0488 0.0840 0.024 28 

PCB 196 0.415 0.440 0.309 0.456 0.336 0.391 0.065 17 

PCB 197 0.0360 0.0469 0.0251 0.0411 0.0309 0.0360 0.0085 24 

PCB 199 1.44 1.90 1.31 1.68 1.27 1.52 0.26 17 

PCB 200 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 201 0.500 0.534 0.432 0.825 0.380 0.534 0.17 32 

PCB 202 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.132 <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 205 0.0298 0.0456 0.0353 0.0292 <LOQ 0.0350 0.0076 22 

PCB 206 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 207 0.0615 0.0624 0.0499 0.0643 0.0468 0.0570 0.0080 14 

PCB 208 0.0854 0.102 0.0995 0.107 <LOQ 0.0987 0.0094 9.6 

PCB 209 0.0805 0.132 0.0955 0.0936 <LOQ 0.101 0.022 22 

115 
Appendix 39. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in thick-billed murre eggs collected at St. George Island, 

Alaska in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference 

value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1321 1331 1333 1334 1335 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.325 0.618 0.206 0.193 0.595 0.388 0.21 53 

BDE99 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.932 <LOQ 

BDE100 0.510 0.500 0.467 0.478 0.573 0.506 0.041 8.1 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 2.18 1.88 2.66 1.78 2.28 2.15 0.35 16 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0873 0.126 0.0491 0.0397 0.0665 0.0737 0.035 47 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0515 0.129 <LOQ 0.0514 0.0970 0.0821 0.038 46 

PCB 52 0.0561 0.288 0.0436 0.0514 0.176 0.123 0.11 87 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 0.276 <LOQ 0.200 <LOQ 0.192 0.223 0.047 21 

PCB 66 2.38 3.02 3.17 2.43 3.19 2.84 0.40 14 

PCB 70 <LOD 0.125 <LOD <LOD 0.0708 0.0981 0.039 39 

PCB 74 2.19 2.53 2.80 2.23 2.79 2.51 0.29 12 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 <LOD 0.0173 <LOD 0.00450 <LOD 0.0109 0.0091 83 

PCB 87 0.135 0.185 0.115 0.0941 0.0966 0.125 0.037 30 

PCB 92 0.0304 0.0953 0.0367 0.0452 0.0729 0.0561 0.027 49 

PCB 95+121 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 99 1.70 6.85 4.94 3.75 7.05 4.86 2.2 46 

PCB 101 0.145 0.143 0.164 <LOD <LOD 0.151 0.012 7.7 

PCB 105 2.98 2.66 2.62 2.30 2.54 2.62 0.24 9.3 

PCB 106 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0287 <LOQ 

PCB 107 0.634 0.385 0.583 0.345 0.586 0.507 0.13 26 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.360 0.311 0.289 0.276 0.279 0.303 0.035 11 

PCB 118 6.91 9.98 9.39 8.11 10.2 8.93 1.4 16 

PCB 119 0.139 0.153 0.103 0.0739 0.158 0.125 0.036 29 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 1.20 1.16 1.11 0.991 1.17 1.13 0.083 7.4 

PCB 130 0.580 0.480 0.495 0.447 0.497 0.500 0.049 9.9 

PCB 137 0.133 0.490 0.245 0.223 0.450 0.308 0.15 50 

PCB 138 1.33 8.05 5.59 5.05 8.12 5.63 2.8 49 

PCB 146 2.35 3.42 2.95 2.67 3.45 2.97 0.48 16 

PCB 149 0.378 0.459 0.344 0.284 0.417 0.376 0.067 18 

116 
Appendix 39 (Continued). 

Compound 1321 1331 1333 1334 1335 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0879 0.0810 0.0844 0.0049 5.8 

PCB 153+132 7.12 17.3 10.8 9.33 17.4 12.4 4.7 38 

PCB 154 0.0705 0.108 0.0926 0.0878 0.109 0.0936 0.016 17 

PCB 156 0.824 0.670 0.706 0.633 0.695 0.706 0.072 10 

PCB 157 0.252 0.207 0.201 0.184 0.216 0.212 0.025 12 

PCB 158 0.305 0.297 0.288 0.237 0.365 0.299 0.046 15 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 3.07 2.49 2.61 2.71 2.54 2.68 0.23 8.5 

PCB 165 0.0328 0.0354 0.0183 0.0291 0.0269 0.0285 0.0066 23 

PCB 166 0.0770 0.0760 0.0492 0.0563 0.0595 0.0636 0.012 19 

PCB 167 0.277 0.504 0.330 0.296 0.438 0.369 0.098 27 

PCB 170 1.39 1.26 1.24 1.07 1.29 1.25 0.11 9.1 

PCB 172 0.472 0.426 0.423 0.415 0.377 0.422 0.034 8.0 

PCB 174 0.0513 0.0569 0.0445 0.0514 0.0430 0.0494 0.0057 11 

PCB 175 0.0974 0.105 0.0972 0.0941 0.0667 0.0920 0.015 16 

PCB 176 <LOQ 0.0167 <LOQ 0.00721 <LOQ 0.0120 0.0067 56 

PCB 177 0.350 0.350 0.368 0.309 0.292 0.334 0.032 9.6 

PCB 178 0.513 0.442 0.403 0.447 0.360 0.433 0.057 13 

PCB 180+193 1.75 3.22 2.11 1.88 3.32 2.46 0.75 31 

PCB 183 0.839 0.747 0.575 0.520 0.633 0.663 0.13 20 

PCB 185 0.0410 0.0427 0.0198 0.0208 0.0226 0.0294 0.011 39 

PCB 187 3.96 3.49 3.00 2.92 3.19 3.31 0.43 13 

PCB 188 0.0326 0.0226 0.0276 0.0190 0.0214 0.0246 0.0054 22 

PCB 189 0.0762 0.0721 0.0239 0.0724 0.0656 0.0620 0.022 35 

PCB 191 0.0279 0.0145 0.0290 0.0330 0.0188 0.0246 0.0077 31 

PCB 194 0.344 0.222 0.315 0.248 0.262 0.278 0.050 18 

PCB 195 0.162 0.136 0.114 0.130 0.168 0.142 0.022 16 

PCB 196 0.700 0.651 0.716 0.613 0.766 0.689 0.059 8.6 

PCB 197 0.0508 0.0712 0.0568 0.0263 0.0459 0.0502 0.016 33 

PCB 199 3.14 2.70 3.19 2.50 2.97 2.90 0.29 10 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 0.968 0.818 1.08 0.742 0.796 0.880 0.14 16 

PCB 202 0.0383 0.0472 0.0545 0.0595 <LOQ 0.0499 0.0092 18 

PCB 205 0.0324 0.0278 0.0197 0.0234 0.0214 0.0249 0.0051 21 

PCB 206 0.200 0.139 0.248 0.271 0.172 0.206 0.054 26 

PCB 207 0.0475 0.0475 0.0598 0.0466 0.0712 0.0545 0.011 20 

PCB 208 0.129 0.0731 0.120 0.166 0.149 0.127 0.035 28 

PCB 209 0.0927 0.0852 0.120 0.117 0.140 0.111 0.022 20 

117 
Appendix 40. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in common murre eggs collected at St. George Island, 

Alaska in 2009 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference 

value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1463 1466 1469 1470 1472 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.319 0.426 0.101 0.464 0.336 0.329 0.14 43 

BDE99 0.0955 0.116 <LOQ 0.139 0.110 0.115 0.018 16 

BDE100 0.221 0.147 <LOD 0.299 0.212 0.220 0.062 28 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB28+31 1.86 2.42 1.93 1.85 2.12 2.03 0.24 12 

PCB 29 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 44 0.0553 0.0603 0.0682 0.0776 0.0672 0.0657 0.0085 13 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0441 0.0535 0.0372 0.0626 0.0885 0.0572 0.020 35 

PCB 52 0.137 0.156 0.114 0.162 0.164 0.147 0.021 14 

PCB 56 0.140 0.159 0.146 0.150 0.147 0.148 0.0068 4.6 

PCB 63 0.0749 0.130 0.107 0.116 0.140 0.113 0.025 22 

PCB 66 0.878 1.66 1.52 1.69 1.54 1.46 0.33 23 

PCB 70 0.0489 0.0588 0.0458 0.0871 0.0751 0.0631 0.018 28 

PCB 74 0.729 1.26 1.16 1.25 1.23 1.12 0.22 20 

PCB 79 0.0248 0.0296 0.0303 0.0331 0.0431 0.0322 0.0068 21 

PCB 82 0.0292 0.0408 0.0376 0.0444 0.0387 0.0381 0.0056 15 

PCB 87 0.0140 0.102 0.0574 0.0966 0.0897 0.0719 0.037 51 

PCB 92 0.105 0.272 0.0866 0.101 0.0959 0.132 0.079 60 

PCB 95+121 0.0188 0.0617 <LOD 0.0384 0.0453 0.0411 0.018 43 

PCB 99 5.67 4.02 3.10 3.60 3.30 3.94 1.0 26 

PCB 101 0.199 0.203 0.152 0.211 0.191 0.191 0.023 12 

PCB 105 1.05 1.25 1.14 1.24 1.12 1.16 0.084 7.3 

PCB 106 0.0229 0.0493 0.0237 0.0274 0.0186 0.0284 0.012 43 

PCB 107 0.193 0.258 0.241 0.187 0.251 0.226 0.033 15 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 112 0.00695 0.0106 0.00818 0.0119 0.0129 0.0101 0.0025 25 

PCB 114 0.136 0.141 0.138 0.137 0.140 0.138 0.0023 1.7 

PCB 118 4.00 4.51 4.14 4.30 3.89 4.17 0.24 5.9 

PCB 119 0.103 0.103 0.0417 0.100 0.0927 0.0881 0.026 30 

PCB 127 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 128 0.481 0.553 0.422 0.517 0.468 0.488 0.049 10 

PCB 130 0.189 0.237 0.200 0.228 0.215 0.214 0.020 9.1 

PCB 137 0.151 0.193 0.131 0.171 0.184 0.166 0.025 15 

PCB 138 3.59 4.13 3.51 3.96 3.61 3.76 0.27 7.2 

PCB 146 1.53 1.69 1.53 1.69 1.52 1.59 0.090 5.6 

PCB 149 0.239 0.262 0.227 0.280 0.262 0.254 0.021 8.3 

118 
Appendix 40 (Continued). 

Compound 1463 1466 1469 1470 1472 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0170 <LOQ 

PCB 153+132 7.96 9.13 7.07 8.79 7.76 8.14 0.82 10 

PCB 154 0.0707 0.0810 0.0660 0.0861 0.0838 0.0775 0.0087 11 

PCB 156 0.193 0.303 0.311 0.293 0.298 0.280 0.049 18 

PCB 157 0.0632 0.0814 0.0813 0.0943 0.0975 0.0835 0.014 16 

PCB 158 0.175 0.199 0.212 0.245 0.216 0.209 0.025 12 

PCB 159 <LOQ 0.00628 0.00381 0.00261 0.0273 0.0100 0.012 120 

PCB 163 1.23 1.36 1.40 1.42 1.27 1.34 0.083 6.2 

PCB 165 0.0333 0.0375 0.0390 0.0325 0.0486 0.0382 0.0064 17 

PCB 166 0.0354 0.0394 0.0288 0.0689 0.0473 0.0440 0.015 35 

PCB 167 0.168 0.265 0.250 0.269 0.282 0.247 0.046 18 

PCB 170 0.381 0.741 0.590 0.699 0.578 0.598 0.14 23 

PCB 172 0.188 0.223 0.224 0.220 0.224 0.216 0.016 7.2 

PCB 174 0.0627 0.0798 0.0690 0.0649 0.0949 0.0742 0.013 18 

PCB 175 0.0578 0.0747 0.0542 0.0653 0.0970 0.0698 0.017 25 

PCB 176 <LOQ 0.0318 0.0328 0.0307 0.0573 0.0381 0.013 33 

PCB 177 0.221 0.262 0.257 0.276 0.257 0.255 0.020 7.9 

PCB 178 0.386 0.366 0.330 0.291 0.256 0.326 0.053 16 

PCB 180+193 1.62 1.87 1.50 1.88 1.72 1.72 0.16 9.6 

PCB 183 0.442 0.490 0.460 0.502 0.464 0.472 0.024 5.2 

PCB 185 <LOQ 0.0232 0.0146 0.0178 0.0378 0.0234 0.010 44 

PCB 187 2.02 2.26 2.35 2.24 2.03 2.18 0.15 6.8 

PCB 188 0.0294 0.0359 0.0378 0.0332 0.0482 0.0369 0.0071 19 

PCB 189 <LOQ 0.0415 0.0330 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0372 0.0060 16 

PCB 191 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 194 0.222 0.281 0.271 0.317 0.247 0.268 0.036 13 

PCB 195 0.0560 0.100 0.0797 0.0539 0.0840 0.0748 0.020 26 

PCB 196 0.444 0.448 0.455 0.459 0.439 0.449 0.0079 1.7 

PCB 197 0.0466 0.0309 0.0453 0.0269 0.0741 0.0448 0.019 41 

PCB 199 1.72 1.66 1.85 1.88 1.65 1.75 0.11 6.1 

PCB 200 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 201 0.667 0.779 0.604 0.856 0.749 0.731 0.098 13 

PCB 202 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 205 <LOQ 0.0640 0.0398 0.0346 0.0599 0.0496 0.015 29 

PCB 206 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 207 0.0683 0.0778 0.0537 0.0752 0.0773 0.0704 0.010 14 

PCB 208 0.0999 0.137 0.124 0.109 0.126 0.119 0.015 12 

PCB 209 0.0976 0.127 0.117 0.108 0.119 0.114 0.011 10 

119 
Appendix 41. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) mass 

Fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in common murre eggs collected at St. Lazaria Island, Alaska in 

2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value ranges, 

respectively). 

Compound 1234 1235 1236 1238 1240 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 4.50 3.28 7.92 49.0 9.19 14.8 19 130 

BDE99 1.52 1.02 2.90 6.39 4.34 3.23 2.2 68 

BDE100 1.77 0.972 2.26 14.2 3.38 4.51 5.5 120 

PCB 8 0.0315 0.0245 <LOD 0.0116 <LOD 0.0225 0.010 45 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 1.66 1.56 2.41 3.56 2.92 2.42 0.85 35 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0482 0.0613 0.0885 0.0733 0.0805 0.0703 0.016 23 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0544 0.0664 0.0966 0.120 0.441 0.156 0.16 100 

PCB 52 <LOD 0.0987 0.196 0.229 0.543 0.267 0.19 72 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 0.191 <LOQ <LOQ 0.475 0.202 0.289 0.16 56 

PCB 66 1.56 1.90 2.61 5.64 2.83 2.91 1.6 55 

PCB 70 <LOD 0.0305 0.0847 0.103 0.453 0.168 0.19 120 

PCB 74 1.37 1.36 1.97 4.72 2.33 2.35 1.4 59 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.00448 0.0288 0.0166 0.017 100 

PCB 87 0.105 <LOD 0.134 0.643 0.598 0.370 0.29 78 

PCB 92 0.0298 0.0631 0.109 0.0861 0.150 0.0876 0.046 52 

PCB 95+121 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.188 <LOD 

PCB 99 1.48 3.35 6.47 21.4 8.72 8.28 7.8 95 

PCB 101 <LOD <LOD 0.166 0.184 4.01 1.45 2.2 150 

PCB 105 2.14 1.63 2.89 10.9 2.80 4.08 3.9 95 

PCB 106 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0272 <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 107 0.552 0.285 0.509 2.14 0.751 0.847 0.74 87 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.624 <LOD 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.233 0.161 0.262 0.856 0.267 0.356 0.28 79 

PCB 118 5.12 5.29 9.74 30.8 11.2 12.4 11 85 

PCB 119 0.120 0.0739 0.161 0.546 0.288 0.238 0.19 80 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 1.31 0.612 1.29 6.25 2.25 2.34 2.3 97 

PCB 130 0.641 0.296 0.594 2.63 1.21 1.07 0.93 87 

PCB 137 0.103 0.150 0.308 1.43 0.751 0.549 0.56 100 

PCB 138 1.89 4.46 9.85 41.4 15.7 14.7 16 110 

PCB 146 3.00 2.62 5.35 16.5 5.69 6.62 5.7 85 

PCB 149 0.502 0.318 0.666 0.927 2.64 1.01 0.94 93 

120 
Appendix 41 (Continued). 

Compound 1234 1235 1236 1238 1240 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.0755 <LOQ 0.142 0.202 0.381 0.200 0.13 66 

PCB 153+132 9.12 10.6 23.0 85.9 34.4 32.6 32 97 

PCB 154 0.116 0.0787 0.140 0.294 0.509 0.227 0.18 78 

PCB 156 0.979 0.645 1.33 3.13 1.06 1.43 0.98 69 

PCB 157 0.238 0.154 0.290 0.845 0.296 0.365 0.27 75 

PCB 158 0.585 0.155 0.564 2.29 1.17 0.954 0.83 87 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 4.49 2.26 4.42 15.1 5.51 6.35 5.0 79 

PCB 165 0.0430 0.0294 0.0356 0.150 0.0641 0.0645 0.050 77 

PCB 166 0.0474 0.0327 0.0512 0.164 0.0807 0.0752 0.053 70 

PCB 167 0.232 0.286 0.660 1.74 0.684 0.720 0.61 84 

PCB 170 3.63 1.67 3.14 10.7 4.10 4.65 3.5 75 

PCB 172 0.909 0.512 1.17 2.51 0.889 1.20 0.77 64 

PCB 174 0.0735 0.0412 0.118 0.156 0.494 0.176 0.18 100 

PCB 175 0.151 0.0876 0.174 0.501 0.238 0.230 0.16 70 

PCB 176 <LOQ 0.00515 0.00503 0.0213 0.0544 0.0215 0.023 110 

PCB 177 0.738 0.137 0.631 2.86 2.50 1.37 1.2 89 

PCB 178 0.653 0.141 0.517 3.48 1.00 1.16 1.3 120 

PCB 180+193 3.97 3.31 7.90 24.1 11.2 10.1 8.5 84 

PCB 183 1.84 0.952 2.22 6.54 3.16 2.94 2.2 73 

PCB 185 <LOQ 0.0160 0.0636 0.122 0.136 0.0844 0.055 66 

PCB 187 6.90 2.56 6.47 31.1 9.47 11.3 11 100 

PCB 188 0.0174 0.0148 0.0344 0.0906 0.0361 0.0386 0.031 79 

PCB 189 0.181 0.102 <LOQ 0.412 0.0222 0.179 0.17 94 

PCB 191 0.0679 0.0147 0.0619 0.158 0.151 0.0908 0.062 68 

PCB 194 1.73 0.826 2.50 5.02 1.60 2.33 1.6 69 

PCB 195 0.571 0.304 0.653 1.37 0.479 0.676 0.41 61 

PCB 196 1.60 0.985 1.86 4.58 1.70 2.15 1.4 65 

PCB 197 0.115 0.0471 0.0965 0.323 0.191 0.154 0.11 70 

PCB 199 8.04 4.35 9.08 24.0 6.96 10.5 7.7 74 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 1.87 1.09 2.01 5.57 1.88 2.48 1.8 71 

PCB 202 0.0649 <LOQ 0.0529 0.120 0.295 0.133 0.11 84 

PCB 205 0.0918 0.0278 0.101 0.206 0.0700 0.0993 0.066 67 

PCB 206 0.609 0.434 0.747 2.15 0.651 0.918 0.70 76 

PCB 207 0.0868 0.0796 0.136 0.302 0.140 0.149 0.090 60 

PCB 208 0.213 0.0654 0.182 0.681 0.179 0.264 0.24 91 

PCB 209 0.316 0.298 0.376 1.12 0.346 0.490 0.35 72 

121 
Appendix 42. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in thick-billed murre eggs collected at St. Lazaria Island, 

Alaska in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value 

ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.806 1.17 0.877 10.7 6.82 4.09 4.5 110 

BDE99 0.994 1.48 1.07 3.26 3.17 1.99 1.1 57 

BDE100 0.734 0.703 0.501 2.94 1.98 1.37 1.1 77 

PCB 8 0.0126 0.0222 <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.0174 0.0067 39 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.0324 <LOD 

PCB 28+31 2.11 1.60 1.97 2.26 2.32 2.05 0.29 14 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0960 0.0740 0.0850 0.016 18 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.124 0.121 0.122 0.0019 1.6 

PCB 52 0.0380 0.0317 0.0227 0.281 0.246 0.124 0.13 100 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.196 <LOQ 0.196 

PCB 66 2.36 2.11 2.11 2.64 3.34 2.51 0.51 20 

PCB 70 0.0227 <LOD <LOD 0.155 0.120 0.0992 0.069 69 

PCB 74 1.69 1.55 1.71 2.04 2.49 1.90 0.38 20 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 87 0.0387 0.0524 0.0865 0.190 0.131 0.0997 0.062 62 

PCB 92 0.0333 0.0335 0.0281 0.0951 0.100 0.0581 0.036 62 

PCB 95+121 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 99 2.12 1.80 3.29 7.14 7.35 4.34 2.7 62 

PCB 101 <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.228 0.262 0.245 0.024 9.6 

PCB 105 2.27 2.94 2.40 3.19 3.28 2.82 0.46 16 

PCB 106 0.0216 <LOQ 0.0207 0.0163 <LOQ 0.0196 0.0029 15 

PCB 107 0.468 0.641 0.680 0.699 0.598 0.617 0.092 15 

PCB 110 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.277 0.351 0.232 0.299 0.394 0.310 0.063 20 

PCB 118 7.12 8.34 7.80 11.1 11.0 9.07 1.9 20 

PCB 119 0.0390 0.0508 0.0772 0.203 0.192 0.113 0.079 70 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 0.466 0.699 1.27 1.82 1.55 1.16 0.57 49 

PCB 130 0.345 0.545 0.657 0.875 0.610 0.606 0.19 32 

PCB 137 0.0447 0.0729 0.166 0.419 0.427 0.226 0.19 82 

PCB 138 2.78 3.49 5.99 13.9 10.4 7.32 4.8 65 

PCB 146 3.17 4.36 4.10 6.44 5.37 4.69 1.3 27 

PCB 149 0.263 0.348 0.294 0.747 0.681 0.467 0.23 49 

122 
Appendix 42 (Continued). 

Compound 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 <LOQ 0.0810 <LOQ 0.159 0.169 0.136 0.048 35 

PCB 153+132 8.37 10.0 12.4 32.3 23.1 17.2 10 59 

PCB 154 <LOQ 0.0719 0.109 0.151 0.160 0.123 0.041 33 

PCB 156 1.00 1.55 1.00 1.39 1.31 1.25 0.24 19 

PCB 157 0.213 0.302 0.248 0.330 0.320 0.283 0.050 18 

PCB 158 0.156 0.282 0.340 0.763 0.536 0.415 0.24 57 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0324 <LOQ 

PCB 163 2.24 3.99 4.35 6.03 4.37 4.19 1.3 32 

PCB 165 0.0355 0.0669 0.0428 0.0593 0.0613 0.0532 0.013 25 

PCB 166 0.0536 0.0817 0.0410 0.0592 0.0747 0.0620 0.016 26 

PCB 167 0.447 0.529 0.379 0.819 0.860 0.607 0.22 36 

PCB 170 2.09 4.24 3.19 5.85 3.53 3.78 1.4 37 

PCB 172 0.983 1.60 0.899 1.51 1.25 1.25 0.31 25 

PCB 174 0.0519 0.0784 0.0515 0.104 0.0987 0.0769 0.025 32 

PCB 175 0.106 0.171 0.161 0.236 0.193 0.173 0.047 27 

PCB 176 <LOQ 0.00780 0.00801 0.0210 0.0309 0.0169 0.011 66 

PCB 177 0.139 0.326 0.810 1.03 0.712 0.603 0.36 60 

PCB 178 0.431 1.14 0.732 0.934 0.819 0.811 0.26 32 

PCB 180+193 2.57 4.51 4.19 12.2 7.39 6.17 3.8 61 

PCB 183 1.39 2.01 1.31 3.03 2.36 2.02 0.71 35 

PCB 185 0.0254 0.0339 0.0107 0.0537 0.0741 0.0395 0.025 63 

PCB 187 2.17 4.65 6.74 10.7 7.18 6.29 3.2 50 

PCB 188 0.0311 0.0400 0.0223 0.0297 0.0440 0.0334 0.0086 26 

PCB 189 0.181 0.345 0.0258 0.310 0.236 0.219 0.13 57 

PCB 191 <LOQ 0.0382 0.0524 0.0733 0.0651 0.0573 0.015 27 

PCB 194 1.67 3.36 1.94 3.22 2.09 2.46 0.78 32 

PCB 195 0.487 0.980 0.516 0.851 0.682 0.703 0.21 30 

PCB 196 1.16 1.88 1.35 2.44 1.83 1.73 0.50 29 

PCB 197 0.0889 0.110 0.0887 0.170 0.118 0.115 0.033 29 

PCB 199 6.14 11.7 7.42 11.9 9.11 9.24 2.5 27 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 0.938 2.00 1.48 2.97 1.98 1.87 0.75 40 

PCB 202 0.0501 0.155 0.0697 0.0628 0.0771 0.0829 0.041 50 

PCB 205 0.103 0.153 0.0634 0.138 0.117 0.115 0.035 30 

PCB 206 0.556 1.13 0.680 1.18 0.773 0.863 0.28 32 

PCB 207 0.0791 0.128 0.0857 0.163 0.130 0.117 0.035 30 

PCB 208 0.167 0.323 0.194 0.360 0.203 0.249 0.086 34 

PCB 209 0.277 0.547 0.296 0.608 0.385 0.423 0.15 35 

123 
 

Appendix 43. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at the Kukpuk River 

delta, Alaska in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below 

reference value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1349 1351 1354 1357 1358 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 141 5.48 6.12 126 152 86.0 74 86 

BDE99 156 5.42 5.29 134 147 89.5 77 86 

BDE100 30.0 2.03 2.03 25.9 28.5 17.7 14 81 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 1.72 3.78 3.96 1.53 1.70 2.53 1.2 48 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0593 0.325 0.259 0.0939 0.0606 0.159 0.12 78 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.370 1.77 1.82 0.331 0.376 0.933 0.79 84 

PCB 52 0.762 15.8 17.0 0.705 0.789 7.02 8.6 120 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 66 2.30 6.94 7.15 2.32 2.40 4.22 2.6 61 

PCB 70 <LOD 0.0676 0.0247 0.0237 <LOD 0.0387 0.025 65 

PCB 74 2.26 8.04 8.44 2.22 2.34 4.66 3.3 70 

PCB 79 <LOQ 0.0144 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.0190 0.0939 0.0409 <LOD <LOD 0.0513 0.039 75 

PCB 87 0.546 3.48 3.29 0.452 0.504 1.65 1.6 96 

PCB 92 0.152 5.49 5.52 0.147 0.157 2.29 2.9 130 

PCB 95+121 0.162 3.80 3.58 0.0995 0.188 1.56 1.9 120 

PCB 99 14.8 48.8 48.3 12.9 16.2 28.2 19 66 

PCB 101 2.56 18.7 18.5 2.20 2.68 8.92 8.8 99 

PCB 105 2.93 12.1 14.3 2.58 3.10 7.00 5.7 82 

PCB 106 0.0172 <LOQ 0.0871 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0521 0.049 95 

PCB 107 0.0697 0.388 0.445 0.0389 0.0642 0.201 0.20 98 

PCB 110 1.83 7.39 8.35 1.58 1.90 4.21 3.4 80 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.336 1.11 1.29 0.301 0.316 0.670 0.49 73 

PCB 118 13.0 48.8 55.3 11.8 13.9 28.5 22 76 

PCB 119 0.324 1.19 1.18 0.292 0.342 0.666 0.47 71 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 2.38 9.37 10.1 2.33 2.56 5.35 4.0 75 

PCB 130 0.780 2.57 2.69 0.693 0.732 1.49 1.0 70 

PCB 137 1.37 4.25 4.64 1.22 1.35 2.57 1.7 67 

PCB 138 19.8 68.3 76.4 18.4 21.6 40.9 29 71 

PCB 146 4.79 15.4 16.9 4.49 5.07 9.33 6.3 67 

PCB 149 1.82 13.7 14.3 1.66 1.91 6.67 6.7 100 

124 
Appendix 43 (Continued). 

Compound 1349 1351 1354 1357 1358 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.209 4.41 4.64 0.231 0.238 1.95 2.4 120 

PCB 153+132 48.8 138 154 44.4 51.0 87.3 54 62 

PCB 154 0.445 1.45 1.59 0.392 0.487 0.872 0.59 68 

PCB 156 1.29 3.38 3.58 1.13 1.29 2.14 1.2 58 

PCB 157 0.463 1.10 1.14 0.424 0.462 0.718 0.37 51 

PCB 158 1.14 5.30 5.04 1.37 1.18 2.81 2.2 77 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 4.47 15.2 16.7 4.52 5.22 9.22 6.2 67 

PCB 165 0.0482 0.112 0.125 0.0307 0.0377 0.0707 0.044 63 

PCB 166 0.102 0.284 0.315 0.0879 0.0902 0.176 0.11 65 

PCB 167 0.651 2.80 3.14 0.551 0.691 1.57 1.3 82 

PCB 170 4.75 10.4 11.2 4.35 4.78 7.11 3.4 48 

PCB 172 0.520 1.74 1.74 0.511 0.556 1.01 0.66 65 

PCB 174 0.276 1.74 1.85 0.230 0.255 0.870 0.85 97 

PCB 175 0.188 0.675 0.721 0.179 0.193 0.391 0.28 72 

PCB 176 0.0133 0.115 0.121 0.0306 0.0324 0.0624 0.051 82 

PCB 177 0.392 1.78 1.92 0.351 0.385 0.966 0.81 84 

PCB 178 0.322 3.57 4.01 0.260 0.394 1.71 1.9 110 

PCB 180+193 11.9 28.8 30.6 10.8 12.0 18.8 10 53 

PCB 183 3.04 10.2 11.3 2.64 3.07 6.06 4.3 71 

PCB 185 0.0238 0.220 0.267 <LOQ <LOQ 0.170 0.13 76 

PCB 187 4.51 20.8 23.2 3.79 4.48 11.4 9.7 86 

PCB 188 0.0154 0.0602 0.0817 0.00323 0.0134 0.0348 0.034 98 

PCB 189 0.147 0.0501 0.0224 <LOQ 0.0448 0.0659 0.055 83 

PCB 191 0.104 0.349 0.356 0.124 0.138 0.214 0.13 59 

PCB 194 1.64 2.51 2.69 1.43 1.71 2.00 0.57 28 

PCB 195 0.272 0.611 0.606 0.250 0.265 0.401 0.19 47 

PCB 196 1.36 3.22 3.24 1.27 1.38 2.10 1.0 50 

PCB 197 0.131 0.307 0.286 0.137 0.117 0.195 0.093 47 

PCB 199 3.69 9.78 10.1 3.17 3.25 6.01 3.6 60 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 0.706 3.28 2.85 0.799 0.648 1.66 1.3 78 

PCB 202 0.181 1.07 1.12 0.185 0.191 0.550 0.50 91 

PCB 205 0.0923 0.102 0.124 0.0644 0.0631 0.0891 0.026 29 

PCB 206 0.357 0.636 0.636 0.350 0.291 0.454 0.17 37 

PCB 207 0.0885 0.176 0.214 0.0819 0.0932 0.131 0.060 46 

PCB 208 0.0757 0.152 0.224 0.0261 0.0597 0.107 0.080 74 

PCB 209 0.118 0.250 0.256 0.101 0.125 0.170 0.076 45 

125 
Appendix 44. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at Shishmaref Inlet, 

Alaska in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference 

value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1407 1411 1414 1415 1416 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 1.53 2.16 82.9 1.95 1.66 18.0 36 200 

BDE99 1.06 1.12 86.8 1.40 1.32 18.3 38 210 

BDE100 0.741 0.824 19.7 0.920 0.835 4.59 8.4 180 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD 0.0869 <LOD 0.157 <LOD 0.122 0.050 41 

PCB 28+31 4.20 5.82 4.19 5.11 4.26 4.72 0.73 15 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0576 0.102 0.130 0.345 0.0736 0.142 0.12 83 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.381 0.252 0.392 0.889 0.395 0.462 0.25 53 

PCB 52 2.65 4.00 2.65 4.04 3.68 3.40 0.70 21 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 <LOQ 0.218 <LOQ 0.250 <LOQ 0.234 0.023 9.7 

PCB 66 4.45 7.41 3.95 5.72 5.10 5.33 1.3 25 

PCB 70 0.380 0.423 0.644 0.639 0.148 0.447 0.21 46 

PCB 74 3.99 6.49 4.28 5.26 4.54 4.91 1.0 20 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.109 0.0713 0.0574 0.230 0.0563 0.105 0.073 70 

PCB 87 0.834 1.29 0.762 1.61 1.02 1.10 0.35 32 

PCB 92 0.887 1.86 1.02 1.84 1.28 1.38 0.45 33 

PCB 95+121 0.336 0.541 0.397 0.919 0.369 0.512 0.24 47 

PCB 99 16.6 31.2 19.2 20.0 19.8 21.3 5.7 27 

PCB 101 4.88 5.73 4.32 7.10 6.71 5.75 1.2 21 

PCB 105 4.45 11.4 4.47 6.37 5.23 6.39 2.9 46 

PCB 106 0.0923 0.345 0.0523 0.0855 <LOQ 0.144 0.14 94 

PCB 107 0.364 0.683 0.433 0.540 0.267 0.458 0.16 35 

PCB 110 3.77 6.36 2.50 4.76 3.93 4.27 1.4 33 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.452 0.915 0.399 0.632 0.494 0.578 0.21 36 

PCB 118 17.7 40.1 17.0 23.4 21.1 23.8 9.4 40 

PCB 119 0.365 0.776 0.375 0.484 0.465 0.493 0.17 34 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD 0.0156 <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 3.12 6.67 3.25 4.04 3.71 4.16 1.4 35 

PCB 130 1.02 1.86 0.995 1.52 1.22 1.32 0.37 28 

PCB 137 1.38 3.12 1.26 2.01 1.54 1.86 0.76 41 

PCB 138 22.7 45.6 27.7 31.1 26.5 30.7 8.8 29 

PCB 146 5.68 9.88 6.47 8.36 6.89 7.45 1.7 22 

PCB 149 3.05 4.52 2.50 4.29 3.36 3.55 0.85 24 

126 
Appendix 44 (Continued). 

Compound 1407 1411 1414 1415 1416 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.373 0.787 0.575 1.19 0.460 0.677 0.33 48 

PCB 153+132 44.3 82.2 60.5 63.3 52.6 60.6 14 23 

PCB 154 0.589 1.06 0.657 0.805 0.693 0.761 0.19 24 

PCB 156 1.29 3.08 1.38 1.63 1.40 1.76 0.75 43 

PCB 157 0.379 0.911 0.472 0.497 0.462 0.544 0.21 39 

PCB 158 1.58 2.85 1.77 2.32 1.72 2.05 0.53 26 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 5.72 9.45 5.94 6.84 6.02 6.79 1.5 23 

PCB 165 0.0493 0.0620 0.0489 0.0762 0.0516 0.0576 0.012 20 

PCB 166 0.0813 0.180 0.0848 0.147 0.0952 0.118 0.044 37 

PCB 167 0.826 2.16 0.810 1.33 0.953 1.22 0.57 47 

PCB 170 3.31 5.90 3.96 4.33 3.49 4.20 1.0 25 

PCB 172 0.728 1.09 0.659 0.903 0.771 0.829 0.17 20 

PCB 174 0.382 0.430 0.253 0.502 0.377 0.389 0.091 23 

PCB 175 0.228 0.335 0.178 0.267 0.229 0.248 0.058 24 

PCB 176 <LOQ 0.0332 <LOQ 0.0443 0.0477 0.0417 0.0076 18 

PCB 177 0.755 0.920 0.644 0.859 0.653 0.766 0.12 16 

PCB 178 0.672 1.28 0.825 1.27 0.919 0.993 0.27 27 

PCB 180+193 9.62 15.9 11.2 12.9 10.3 12.0 2.5 21 

PCB 183 3.34 5.48 3.96 5.25 3.72 4.35 0.95 22 

PCB 185 0.0565 0.0613 0.0430 0.0626 0.0336 0.0514 0.013 25 

PCB 187 6.44 9.40 6.26 9.87 7.16 7.83 1.7 22 

PCB 188 0.0172 0.0241 0.0145 0.0175 0.0214 0.0189 0.0038 20 

PCB 189 0.0934 0.189 0.103 0.147 0.0414 0.115 0.056 49 

PCB 191 0.117 0.216 0.0932 0.157 0.113 0.139 0.049 35 

PCB 194 0.845 1.33 1.01 0.991 0.890 1.01 0.19 19 

PCB 195 0.316 0.338 0.312 0.338 0.277 0.316 0.025 7.9 

PCB 196 1.49 1.93 1.64 1.78 1.44 1.66 0.21 12 

PCB 197 0.110 0.152 0.120 0.163 0.125 0.134 0.022 17 

PCB 199 4.50 5.23 3.91 5.14 4.28 4.61 0.56 12 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 0.947 0.964 0.741 0.899 0.846 0.879 0.090 10 

PCB 202 0.269 0.395 0.380 0.389 0.291 0.345 0.060 17 

PCB 205 0.0749 0.0670 0.0199 0.0471 0.0311 0.0480 0.023 48 

PCB 206 0.436 0.346 0.311 0.414 0.266 0.355 0.070 20 

PCB 207 0.0906 0.139 0.108 0.107 0.101 0.109 0.018 17 

PCB 208 0.322 0.119 0.0576 0.0622 0.0787 0.128 0.11 87 

PCB 209 0.0889 0.137 0.161 0.143 0.0888 0.124 0.033 27 

127 
Appendix 45. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at Brevig Mission, 

Alaska in 2009 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference 

value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1433 1435 1436 1439 1441 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 1.86 1.16 2.49 2.51 2.47 2.10 0.59 28 

BDE99 0.404 0.241 0.376 0.524 0.407 0.391 0.10 26 

BDE100 0.462 0.295 0.558 0.527 0.548 0.478 0.11 23 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB28+31 2.72 1.93 3.88 3.03 4.72 3.26 1.1 33 

PCB 29 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 44 0.0682 0.114 0.0792 0.298 0.0624 0.124 0.099 80 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.00832 0.00864 <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0499 0.304 0.314 0.689 0.0581 0.283 0.26 92 

PCB 52 0.574 1.77 1.45 6.15 1.38 2.27 2.2 98 

PCB 56 0.338 0.143 0.250 0.253 0.347 0.266 0.083 31 

PCB 63 0.0733 0.0855 0.115 0.122 0.182 0.115 0.042 37 

PCB 66 4.41 2.75 5.98 5.39 6.20 4.95 1.4 28 

PCB 70 0.0498 0.141 0.0931 0.161 0.0939 0.108 0.044 41 

PCB 74 4.01 2.25 5.62 5.45 5.57 4.58 1.5 32 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0297 0.0263 0.0267 0.0276 0.0018 6.6 

PCB 82 0.0362 0.0469 0.0426 0.162 0.0279 0.0632 0.056 88 

PCB 87 0.524 0.753 1.08 1.51 0.701 0.915 0.39 43 

PCB 92 0.476 0.824 1.07 2.51 0.600 1.10 0.82 75 

PCB 95+121 0.164 0.194 0.209 2.38 0.0605 0.601 0.99 170 

PCB 99 20.5 11.7 30.0 29.1 27.0 23.6 7.6 32 

PCB 101 1.86 4.38 3.73 11.0 2.39 4.67 3.7 79 

PCB 105 5.12 3.38 7.66 6.92 6.94 6.01 1.7 29 

PCB 106 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0297 0.0445 0.0710 0.0484 0.021 43 

PCB 107 0.240 0.163 0.250 0.465 0.386 0.301 0.12 41 

PCB 110 1.49 2.24 2.84 3.27 2.69 2.51 0.68 27 

PCB 112 0.0333 0.0305 0.0643 0.0388 0.0458 0.0425 0.013 32 

PCB 114 0.504 0.319 0.661 0.638 0.605 0.545 0.14 26 

PCB 118 20.0 12.3 27.0 26.1 25.3 22.1 6.1 28 

PCB 119 0.462 0.279 0.684 0.634 0.628 0.537 0.17 31 

PCB 127 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 128 3.87 2.11 4.86 5.42 4.56 4.16 1.3 31 

PCB 130 1.04 0.542 1.41 1.73 1.24 1.19 0.44 37 

PCB 137 1.64 0.868 2.07 2.47 1.93 1.80 0.60 33 

PCB 138 26.9 13.9 33.2 36.9 30.3 28.2 8.8 31 

PCB 146 6.66 3.50 8.17 9.36 7.83 7.10 2.2 31 

PCB 149 2.25 1.91 4.50 9.33 2.53 4.10 3.1 75 

128 
Appendix 45 (Continued). 

Compound 1433 1435 1436 1439 1441 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.178 0.328 0.578 2.93 0.142 0.831 1.2 140 

PCB 153+132 55.5 27.6 64.3 78.7 61.6 57.5 19 33 

PCB 154 0.664 0.388 0.857 0.966 0.820 0.739 0.22 30 

PCB 156 1.35 0.836 1.81 1.77 1.71 1.49 0.41 28 

PCB 157 0.395 0.238 0.471 0.558 0.482 0.429 0.12 28 

PCB 158 0.992 0.619 1.49 1.76 1.54 1.28 0.46 36 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 5.82 2.84 7.96 9.01 6.68 6.46 2.4 37 

PCB 165 0.0723 0.0400 0.0694 0.0912 0.0774 0.0700 0.019 27 

PCB 166 0.0555 0.0688 0.169 0.130 0.177 0.120 0.056 47 

PCB 167 1.07 0.664 1.23 1.43 1.29 1.14 0.29 26 

PCB 170 4.28 2.21 4.24 6.17 4.40 4.26 1.4 33 

PCB 172 0.822 0.412 0.914 1.29 0.855 0.858 0.31 36 

PCB 174 0.357 0.271 0.575 1.48 0.342 0.605 0.50 83 

PCB 175 0.327 0.163 0.354 0.472 0.354 0.334 0.11 33 

PCB 176 0.0341 0.0422 0.0487 0.183 0.0385 0.0694 0.064 92 

PCB 177 0.882 0.422 1.43 2.23 0.948 1.18 0.68 58 

PCB 178 0.981 0.501 1.54 2.49 1.12 1.33 0.75 56 

PCB 180+193 12.9 6.25 13.9 19.9 12.9 13.2 4.9 37 

PCB 183 4.39 2.08 4.31 6.32 4.51 4.32 1.5 35 

PCB 185 0.0146 0.0291 0.0303 0.175 0.0170 0.0532 0.069 130 

PCB 187 8.82 3.86 10.4 14.8 9.48 9.47 3.9 41 

PCB 188 0.0346 0.0264 0.0500 0.0687 0.0388 0.0437 0.016 38 

PCB 189 0.133 0.0820 0.0143 0.203 0.169 0.120 0.074 62 

PCB 191 0.144 0.0680 0.147 0.195 0.165 0.144 0.047 33 

PCB 194 1.24 0.536 1.46 2.13 1.15 1.31 0.58 44 

PCB 195 0.295 0.183 0.303 0.311 0.293 0.277 0.053 19 

PCB 196 2.12 0.928 2.07 3.29 1.96 2.07 0.84 40 

PCB 197 0.170 0.0748 0.164 0.242 0.151 0.160 0.060 37 

PCB 199 6.11 2.26 7.24 12.4 5.70 6.74 3.7 54 

PCB 200 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 201 1.34 0.537 1.92 3.50 1.31 1.72 1.1 64 

PCB 202 0.481 0.238 0.721 1.34 0.510 0.658 0.42 64 

PCB 205 0.0622 0.0319 0.0689 0.0737 0.0547 0.0583 0.016 28 

PCB 206 0.443 <LOQ 0.435 0.747 0.371 0.499 0.17 34 

PCB 207 0.168 0.0822 0.171 0.309 0.149 0.176 0.083 47 

PCB 208 0.222 0.0952 0.232 0.474 0.197 0.244 0.14 57 

PCB 209 0.264 0.0797 0.284 0.615 0.180 0.285 0.20 71 

129 
Appendix 46. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) mass 

fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at the Sinuk River delta, Alaska in 

2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value ranges, 

respectively). 

Compound 1339 1340 1340-2 1340 Mean % difference 1343 1344 1345 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 1.74 1.83 1.81 1.82 0.98 2.06 2.18 0.997 1.76 0.46 26 

BDE99 0.941 1.60 1.64 1.62 -2.3 1.02 1.28 1.02 1.18 0.28 24 

BDE100 0.731 0.955 0.937 0.946 1.9 0.913 1.14 0.660 0.877 0.19 21 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 3.82 3.38 3.22 3.30 4.8 3.59 4.35 2.81 3.57 0.58 16 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0695 0.140 0.142 0.141 -1.4 0.0830 0.171 0.165 0.126 0.047 37 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.202 0.545 0.527 0.536 3.3 0.168 0.697 0.264 0.373 0.23 62 

PCB 52 1.29 2.71 2.59 2.65 4.5 1.86 3.48 2.41 2.34 0.82 35 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0284 0.0258 <LOQ 

PCB 63 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 66 5.36 4.01 3.80 3.91 5.4 3.49 5.58 3.80 4.43 0.97 22 

PCB 70 0.196 0.760 0.753 0.756 0.89 0.419 0.378 0.184 0.387 0.23 60 

PCB 74 0.381 3.51 3.29 3.40 6.5 3.36 4.77 3.19 3.02 1.6 53 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.0847 0.289 0.288 0.288 0.14 0.0140 0.145 0.0848 0.123 0.10 84 

PCB 87 0.739 0.814 0.846 0.830 -3.8 0.522 1.28 0.566 0.787 0.30 38 

PCB 92 0.386 0.903 0.864 0.884 4.4 0.739 1.14 0.884 0.806 0.28 34 

PCB 95+121 0.230 0.567 0.578 0.572 -1.9 0.197 0.729 0.530 0.452 0.23 51 

PCB 99 19.7 12.7 12.4 12.6 2.4 14.7 19.9 11.7 15.7 3.9 25 

PCB 101 4.81 4.76 4.53 4.64 4.8 2.46 6.28 2.59 4.16 1.6 39 

PCB 105 6.98 3.99 3.72 3.86 7.0 4.10 6.45 4.13 5.10 1.5 29 

PCB 106 0.107 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.104 0.0430 <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 107 0.307 0.515 0.506 0.510 1.9 0.520 0.365 0.279 0.396 0.11 29 

PCB 110 4.87 3.92 3.80 3.86 3.4 2.64 3.97 2.56 3.58 0.98 27 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.596 0.379 0.383 0.381 -0.99 0.376 0.628 0.372 0.471 0.13 28 

PCB 118 25.2 15.5 14.8 15.1 5.0 16.7 25.5 14.5 19.4 5.5 28 

PCB 119 0.503 0.319 0.317 0.318 0.68 0.370 0.478 0.328 0.399 0.086 22 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 4.36 2.73 2.61 2.67 4.6 2.93 4.61 2.41 3.40 1.0 30 

PCB 130 1.40 0.817 0.791 0.804 3.2 0.848 1.62 0.892 1.11 0.37 34 

PCB 137 2.01 1.13 1.12 1.12 0.25 1.24 2.12 1.05 1.51 0.51 34 

PCB 138 30.5 18.4 17.5 17.9 4.9 21.8 33.2 16.1 23.9 7.6 32 

PCB 146 7.18 4.27 4.09 4.18 4.4 5.60 8.92 4.27 6.03 2.0 34 

PCB 149 3.64 3.68 3.55 3.61 3.5 2.04 3.36 1.99 2.93 0.84 29 

130 
Appendix 46 (Continued). 

Compound 1339 1340 1340-2 1340 Mean % difference 1343 1344 1345 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.327 0.584 0.585 0.584 -0.17 0.300 0.571 0.423 0.441 0.13 30 

PCB 153+132 55.2 33.7 32.1 32.9 4.9 51.3 69.3 29.4 47.6 17 35 

PCB 154 0.732 0.498 0.493 0.496 1.1 0.551 0.864 0.479 0.624 0.17 27 

PCB 156 1.80 1.10 1.07 1.09 3.0 1.32 2.00 0.949 1.43 0.45 32 

PCB 157 0.540 0.333 0.324 0.328 3.0 0.366 0.545 0.277 0.411 0.12 30 

PCB 158 1.89 1.18 1.19 1.18 -1.5 1.42 2.11 1.01 1.52 0.47 31 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 6.70 4.00 3.88 3.94 3.0 5.10 7.23 3.57 5.31 1.6 31 

PCB 165 0.0357 0.0360 0.0358 0.0359 0.70 0.0449 0.0676 0.0382 0.0445 0.013 30 

PCB 166 0.113 0.0833 0.0800 0.0817 4.0 0.0783 0.126 0.0654 0.0929 0.026 28 

PCB 167 1.21 0.749 0.723 0.736 3.5 0.877 1.61 0.771 1.04 0.37 36 

PCB 170 3.91 2.43 2.34 2.38 3.8 3.65 5.51 2.07 3.50 1.4 39 

PCB 172 0.810 0.470 0.451 0.461 4.0 0.693 1.16 0.436 0.712 0.30 42 

PCB 174 0.473 0.382 0.369 0.376 3.6 0.230 0.430 0.207 0.343 0.12 35 

PCB 175 0.290 0.162 0.171 0.167 -5.6 0.183 0.388 0.168 0.239 0.098 41 

PCB 176 0.0348 0.0262 0.0300 0.0281 -14 0.0333 0.0365 <LOQ 0.0332 0.0036 11 

PCB 177 0.851 0.666 0.650 0.658 2.4 0.554 1.00 0.500 0.713 0.21 29 

PCB 178 0.850 0.547 0.531 0.539 3.1 0.910 1.18 0.617 0.819 0.25 31 

PCB 180+193 11.0 6.95 6.60 6.78 5.3 9.82 16.7 5.77 10.0 4.3 43 

PCB 183 3.90 2.33 2.25 2.29 3.4 3.38 5.92 2.20 3.54 1.5 43 

PCB 185 0.0691 0.0610 0.0586 0.0598 4.1 0.0360 0.0604 0.0509 0.0553 0.013 23 

PCB 187 8.01 4.58 4.27 4.42 6.9 5.30 10.4 4.26 6.48 2.7 41 

PCB 188 0.0175 0.0201 0.0201 0.0201 0.41 0.0158 0.0207 0.0128 0.0174 0.0032 19 

PCB 189 0.147 0.0955 0.0947 0.0951 0.87 0.133 0.229 0.0451 0.130 0.068 52 

PCB 191 0.127 0.0824 0.0822 0.0823 0.33 0.103 0.195 0.0756 0.116 0.048 41 

PCB 194 0.813 0.478 0.477 0.477 0.17 1.09 1.53 0.500 0.883 0.44 50 

PCB 195 0.278 0.226 0.222 0.224 1.9 0.311 0.418 0.180 0.282 0.091 32 

PCB 196 1.40 1.18 1.14 1.16 3.5 1.51 2.24 1.03 1.47 0.47 32 

PCB 197 0.107 0.111 0.110 0.110 0.79 0.0938 0.191 0.0764 0.116 0.044 38 

PCB 199 4.30 3.22 3.21 3.21 0.47 4.06 6.50 2.66 4.15 1.5 35 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 1.20 0.777 0.794 0.785 -2.1 0.704 1.08 0.589 0.873 0.26 30 

PCB 202 0.293 0.266 0.272 0.269 -2.0 0.408 0.378 0.201 0.310 0.084 27 

PCB 205 0.0403 0.0369 0.0356 0.0362 3.6 0.0405 0.0409 0.0465 0.0409 0.0037 9.0 

PCB 206 0.201 0.310 0.323 0.316 -4.0 0.366 0.314 0.232 0.286 0.068 24 

PCB 207 0.0961 0.0937 0.0965 0.0951 -3.0 0.0930 0.134 0.0582 0.0952 0.027 28 

PCB 208 0.0800 0.0949 0.0955 0.0952 -0.62 0.110 0.109 0.0287 0.0844 0.033 40 

PCB 209 0.190 0.192 0.202 0.197 -5.0 0.127 0.172 0.112 0.160 0.038 24 

131 
Appendix 47. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at Safety Sound, Alaska 

in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value 

ranges, respectively). Egg 1367 is believed to be a common eider. 

Compound 1365 1367 1368 1369 1370 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 1.22 2.62 1.54 1.17 1.68 1.65 0.58 36 

BDE99 1.11 1.10 0.987 1.06 1.07 1.06 0.047 4.4 

BDE100 0.725 0.993 0.722 0.838 0.794 0.814 0.11 14 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD 0.0189 <LOD 0.0537 0.0363 0.025 68 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 2.38 4.12 3.77 2.65 2.92 3.17 0.75 24 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.146 0.0637 0.103 0.0453 0.124 0.0963 0.042 43 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.257 0.0553 0.269 0.0915 0.146 0.164 0.096 59 

PCB 52 1.89 0.652 3.36 0.765 2.28 1.79 1.1 63 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0256 <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 <LOQ <LOQ 0.198 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 66 2.54 7.66 4.87 3.69 4.49 4.65 1.9 41 

PCB 70 0.0943 0.0462 0.263 0.0397 0.207 0.130 0.10 77 

PCB 74 2.30 6.91 4.26 3.27 3.80 4.11 1.7 42 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.0397 0.0239 0.0277 0.00762 0.247 0.0692 0.10 150 

PCB 87 0.437 0.938 0.601 0.289 0.504 0.554 0.24 44 

PCB 92 0.857 0.410 1.13 0.381 0.922 0.740 0.33 45 

PCB 95+121 0.283 0.249 0.372 <LOD 0.441 0.336 0.087 26 

PCB 99 10.1 33.0 15.2 11.9 15.1 17.1 9.2 54 

PCB 101 2.81 0.431 3.74 0.394 2.20 1.92 1.5 77 

PCB 105 2.33 9.05 4.63 2.94 4.64 4.72 2.6 56 

PCB 106 0.0248 0.0231 0.235 0.0431 0.0603 0.0773 0.090 120 

PCB 107 0.141 0.110 0.479 0.175 0.307 0.243 0.15 63 

PCB 110 2.16 1.76 3.23 0.845 3.38 2.27 1.1 46 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.253 0.843 0.428 0.267 0.423 0.443 0.24 54 

PCB 118 10.2 36.1 18.0 12.9 17.8 19.0 10 53 

PCB 119 0.261 0.838 0.396 0.292 0.388 0.435 0.23 53 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 1.80 6.61 3.01 2.36 3.18 3.39 1.9 55 

PCB 130 0.411 1.62 0.862 0.794 0.971 0.932 0.44 47 

PCB 137 0.753 2.90 1.40 1.17 1.48 1.54 0.81 53 

PCB 138 12.7 50.3 20.4 17.3 22.4 24.6 15 60 

PCB 146 3.31 12.8 5.03 4.72 5.40 6.26 3.8 60 

PCB 149 1.50 2.53 2.51 1.37 2.94 2.17 0.70 32 

132 
Appendix 47 (Continued). 

Compound 1365 1367 1368 1369 1370 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.400 0.262 0.448 0.180 0.581 0.374 0.16 42 

PCB 153+132 25.8 104 39.2 37.1 39.9 49.3 31 64 

PCB 154 0.414 1.31 0.572 0.504 0.624 0.685 0.36 52 

PCB 156 0.758 2.89 1.33 0.986 1.36 1.46 0.83 57 

PCB 157 0.215 0.764 0.400 0.307 0.403 0.418 0.21 50 

PCB 158 0.942 4.05 1.70 1.31 1.31 1.86 1.3 67 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 3.11 10.5 4.54 4.31 4.95 5.49 2.9 53 

PCB 165 0.0315 0.104 0.0542 0.0557 0.0418 0.0575 0.028 48 

PCB 166 0.0733 0.177 0.0862 0.0903 0.0999 0.105 0.041 39 

PCB 167 0.413 2.14 0.927 0.669 0.886 1.01 0.67 66 

PCB 170 1.71 8.60 2.97 2.63 2.75 3.73 2.8 74 

PCB 172 0.336 1.58 0.538 0.537 0.602 0.719 0.49 69 

PCB 174 0.154 0.308 0.200 0.149 0.304 0.223 0.078 35 

PCB 175 0.0814 0.509 0.247 0.199 0.182 0.244 0.16 66 

PCB 176 0.0161 <LOQ 0.0421 <LOQ 0.0296 0.0292 0.013 44 

PCB 177 0.278 1.16 0.470 0.507 0.576 0.599 0.33 56 

PCB 178 0.409 1.80 0.635 0.631 0.553 0.806 0.56 70 

PCB 180+193 4.89 23.0 8.24 7.32 7.68 10.2 7.2 71 

PCB 183 1.70 8.29 2.80 2.67 2.72 3.64 2.6 73 

PCB 185 0.0519 0.0316 0.0440 <LOQ 0.0139 0.0354 0.017 47 

PCB 187 2.56 15.1 4.53 4.51 4.97 6.33 5.0 79 

PCB 188 0.0119 0.0596 0.0122 0.0198 0.0202 0.0248 0.020 80 

PCB 189 0.0749 0.281 0.141 0.111 0.0990 0.141 0.082 58 

PCB 191 0.0808 0.277 0.114 0.138 0.111 0.144 0.077 53 

PCB 194 0.398 2.35 0.768 0.612 0.544 0.934 0.80 86 

PCB 195 0.168 0.764 0.241 0.259 0.223 0.331 0.24 74 

PCB 196 1.01 3.22 1.31 1.14 1.19 1.57 0.92 59 

PCB 197 0.0968 0.258 0.141 0.0804 0.116 0.138 0.070 51 

PCB 199 2.27 9.94 3.35 3.26 3.26 4.41 3.1 71 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 0.472 1.94 0.945 1.23 0.728 1.06 0.56 53 

PCB 202 0.213 0.567 0.224 0.284 0.193 0.296 0.16 52 

PCB 205 0.0434 0.123 0.0892 0.117 0.0868 0.0919 0.032 34 

PCB 206 0.183 0.721 0.277 0.374 0.195 0.350 0.22 63 

PCB 207 0.0495 0.234 0.0969 0.0922 0.101 0.115 0.070 61 

PCB 208 0.0790 0.233 0.0605 0.0867 0.0521 0.102 0.074 73 

PCB 209 0.0987 0.173 0.188 0.115 0.118 0.138 0.039 28 

133 
 

Appendix 48. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl 

(PCB) mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at Bluff, 

Alaska in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below 

reference value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1384 1385 1388 1389 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 1.29 4.92 6.17 7.03 4.85 2.5 52 

BDE99 1.01 4.62 6.82 7.35 4.95 2.9 58 

BDE100 0.811 1.39 1.92 2.21 1.58 0.62 39 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 3.79 2.85 3.77 3.32 3.43 0.45 13 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.199 0.0605 <LOQ 0.116 0.125 0.070 56 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.171 0.0656 0.0866 0.531 0.214 0.22 100 

PCB 52 2.94 0.546 0.668 2.45 1.65 1.2 74 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 <LOQ <LOQ 0.203 <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 66 3.74 3.50 4.22 4.31 3.94 0.39 9.8 

PCB 70 0.583 0.0595 0.109 0.167 0.230 0.24 100 

PCB 74 3.43 3.11 3.74 3.88 3.54 0.34 9.6 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.190 0.0528 0.0496 0.0737 0.0916 0.067 73 

PCB 87 0.533 0.286 0.401 0.716 0.484 0.18 38 

PCB 92 1.19 0.332 0.448 0.759 0.681 0.38 56 

PCB 95+121 0.915 0.0425 0.0652 0.400 0.356 0.41 110 

PCB 99 14.7 10.2 13.4 17.3 13.9 2.9 21 

PCB 101 2.72 0.188 0.214 4.42 1.89 2.1 110 

PCB 105 4.36 3.49 4.81 5.90 4.64 1.0 22 

PCB 106 0.0102 0.117 0.0655 0.116 0.0772 0.051 66 

PCB 107 0.524 0.344 0.530 0.326 0.431 0.11 26 

PCB 110 3.79 1.54 2.16 3.91 2.85 1.2 42 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.429 0.324 0.428 0.585 0.442 0.11 24 

PCB 118 17.6 12.6 16.5 21.7 17.1 3.7 22 

PCB 119 0.373 0.282 0.380 0.404 0.360 0.054 15 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 2.96 2.17 2.83 3.75 2.93 0.65 22 

PCB 130 0.851 0.569 0.722 1.15 0.824 0.25 30 

PCB 137 1.26 0.946 1.21 1.60 1.26 0.27 21 

PCB 138 20.6 14.1 18.7 28.1 20.4 5.8 29 

PCB 146 5.36 3.51 4.64 8.01 5.38 1.9 36 

PCB 149 3.28 1.63 2.00 3.37 2.57 0.88 34 

134 
Appendix 48 (Continued). 

Compound 1384 1385 1388 1389 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.837 0.227 0.273 0.469 0.452 0.28 62 

PCB 153+132 43.7 27.1 36.2 58.7 41.4 13 32 

PCB 154 0.540 0.400 0.509 0.614 0.516 0.089 17 

PCB 156 1.36 0.942 1.18 1.92 1.35 0.42 31 

PCB 157 0.367 0.284 0.342 0.521 0.378 0.10 27 

PCB 158 1.69 0.904 0.949 1.90 1.36 0.51 37 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 4.50 3.03 3.57 6.42 4.38 1.5 34 

PCB 165 0.0324 0.0307 0.0399 0.0435 0.0366 0.0061 17 

PCB 166 0.0958 0.0814 0.0999 0.153 0.107 0.031 29 

PCB 167 0.897 0.538 0.901 1.48 0.954 0.39 41 

PCB 170 2.98 1.85 2.55 4.64 3.01 1.2 39 

PCB 172 0.592 0.391 0.529 1.13 0.660 0.32 49 

PCB 174 0.342 0.174 0.225 0.401 0.285 0.10 37 

PCB 175 0.180 0.147 0.166 0.319 0.203 0.079 39 

PCB 176 0.0331 <LOQ 0.0105 0.0310 0.0249 0.012 50 

PCB 177 0.535 0.286 0.433 0.688 0.486 0.17 35 

PCB 178 0.703 0.360 0.627 0.773 0.616 0.18 29 

PCB 180+193 8.56 5.52 7.39 13.0 8.61 3.2 37 

PCB 183 2.81 1.94 2.85 4.70 3.07 1.2 38 

PCB 185 0.0141 <LOQ <LOQ 0.0367 0.0254 0.016 63 

PCB 187 5.04 2.86 4.78 10.2 5.72 3.1 55 

PCB 188 0.00794 0.00551 0.0195 0.0299 0.0157 0.011 72 

PCB 189 <LOQ 0.103 <LOQ 0.208 0.156 0.075 48 

PCB 191 0.121 0.0779 0.0856 0.139 0.106 0.029 27 

PCB 194 0.818 0.406 0.665 1.49 0.846 0.46 55 

PCB 195 0.235 0.163 0.197 0.348 0.236 0.080 34 

PCB 196 1.24 0.964 1.19 1.98 1.35 0.44 33 

PCB 197 0.0852 0.0753 0.0924 0.164 0.104 0.041 39 

PCB 199 3.47 2.41 3.13 6.75 3.94 1.9 49 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 0.735 0.477 0.695 1.66 0.891 0.52 59 

PCB 202 0.299 0.188 0.205 0.229 0.230 0.049 21 

PCB 205 0.0553 0.0155 0.0378 0.0786 0.0468 0.027 57 

PCB 206 0.834 0.0247 0.217 0.394 0.367 0.35 94 

PCB 207 0.0714 0.0610 0.0804 0.148 0.0902 0.039 44 

PCB 208 <LOQ 0.0500 0.0409 0.115 0.0685 0.040 59 

PCB 209 0.167 0.0541 0.135 0.192 0.137 0.060 44 

135 
Appendix 49. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at Carolyn Island, Alaska 

in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value ranges, 

respectively). 

Compound 1390 1393 1394 1397 1398 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 1.29 1.06 1.85 0.894 1.31 1.28 0.36 28 

BDE99 0.958 0.922 1.38 0.896 0.928 1.02 0.20 20 

BDE100 0.725 0.717 0.825 0.672 0.675 0.723 0.062 8.6 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 2.68 3.74 3.65 3.70 4.11 3.57 0.53 15 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0954 0.192 0.177 0.142 0.183 0.158 0.040 25 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0896 0.366 0.293 0.412 0.551 0.342 0.17 50 

PCB 52 0.626 2.74 3.96 3.75 3.78 2.97 1.4 47 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 <LOQ <LOQ 0.209 <LOQ 0.182 0.196 0.019 9.8 

PCB 66 4.20 4.15 4.37 3.72 5.15 4.32 0.52 12 

PCB 70 0.101 0.256 0.376 0.395 0.335 0.292 0.12 41 

PCB 74 3.73 3.72 3.91 3.20 4.51 3.81 0.47 12 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ 0.00943 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.0120 0.0205 0.0275 0.0703 0.0335 0.0328 0.022 69 

PCB 87 0.408 0.721 0.637 0.805 1.15 0.743 0.27 36 

PCB 92 0.346 1.23 1.67 1.02 1.36 1.13 0.50 44 

PCB 95+121 0.180 0.560 0.633 0.699 0.572 0.529 0.20 38 

PCB 99 15.1 14.9 14.4 11.6 16.6 14.5 1.8 13 

PCB 101 0.258 3.65 4.04 4.84 6.05 3.77 2.2 57 

PCB 105 4.31 4.51 4.78 3.70 5.29 4.52 0.59 13 

PCB 106 0.0828 0.0513 0.125 0.0588 0.0103 0.0656 0.042 64 

PCB 107 0.365 0.387 0.692 0.332 0.440 0.443 0.14 33 

PCB 110 1.60 2.99 4.41 3.27 4.15 3.28 1.1 34 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.407 0.438 0.427 0.352 0.507 0.426 0.056 13 

PCB 118 17.5 17.0 17.5 13.1 19.7 17.0 2.4 14 

PCB 119 0.399 0.370 0.353 0.288 0.424 0.367 0.052 14 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 3.12 2.81 3.11 2.07 3.18 2.86 0.46 16 

PCB 130 0.881 0.873 0.679 0.579 0.875 0.778 0.14 18 

PCB 137 1.34 1.24 1.33 0.847 1.41 1.23 0.22 18 

PCB 138 22.1 20.0 20.4 13.9 22.8 19.8 3.5 18 

PCB 146 5.85 4.96 4.72 3.53 5.70 4.95 0.93 19 

PCB 149 2.25 2.70 3.49 2.51 3.35 2.86 0.54 19 

136 
Appendix 49 (Continued). 

Compound 1390 1393 1394 1397 1398 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.256 0.592 0.810 0.546 0.720 0.585 0.21 36 

PCB 153+132 44.7 37.6 37.7 26.0 43.1 37.8 7.3 19 

PCB 154 0.656 0.531 0.559 0.453 0.599 0.559 0.076 14 

PCB 156 1.30 1.16 1.39 0.925 1.42 1.24 0.20 16 

PCB 157 0.383 0.333 0.431 0.243 0.427 0.363 0.078 21 

PCB 158 1.24 1.04 1.74 0.811 1.44 1.25 0.36 29 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 4.77 4.18 4.29 3.16 4.89 4.26 0.69 16 

PCB 165 0.0406 0.0315 0.0386 0.0360 0.0324 0.0358 0.0039 11 

PCB 166 0.103 0.0804 0.0792 0.0648 0.0879 0.0831 0.014 17 

PCB 167 0.914 0.795 0.797 0.529 0.948 0.796 0.16 21 

PCB 170 3.10 2.47 2.80 1.85 2.83 2.61 0.48 18 

PCB 172 0.699 0.505 0.502 0.357 0.578 0.528 0.12 24 

PCB 174 0.248 0.268 0.313 0.233 0.335 0.279 0.043 15 

PCB 175 0.206 0.147 0.132 0.141 0.217 0.169 0.040 23 

PCB 176 0.0140 0.0130 0.0304 0.0216 0.0358 0.0229 0.010 44 

PCB 177 0.636 0.556 0.481 0.336 0.598 0.521 0.12 23 

PCB 178 0.624 0.754 0.758 0.464 0.608 0.642 0.12 19 

PCB 180+193 8.96 7.11 7.97 4.93 8.21 7.44 1.5 21 

PCB 183 3.21 2.60 2.70 1.66 2.98 2.63 0.59 23 

PCB 185 0.0185 0.0281 0.0284 0.0250 0.0392 0.0278 0.0075 27 

PCB 187 6.42 4.94 4.65 3.03 5.51 4.91 1.2 25 

PCB 188 0.0109 0.00976 0.0175 0.0125 0.0185 0.0138 0.0040 29 

PCB 189 0.162 0.107 0.114 0.0800 0.122 0.117 0.030 25 

PCB 191 0.118 0.0821 0.103 0.0997 0.102 0.101 0.013 13 

PCB 194 0.944 0.488 0.664 0.469 0.644 0.642 0.19 30 

PCB 195 0.316 0.161 0.197 0.166 0.243 0.216 0.065 30 

PCB 196 1.60 1.10 1.17 0.966 1.16 1.20 0.24 20 

PCB 197 0.143 0.114 0.121 0.0580 0.113 0.110 0.032 29 

PCB 199 4.70 3.04 3.16 1.99 3.26 3.23 0.97 30 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 1.08 0.848 0.913 0.454 0.760 0.810 0.23 28 

PCB 202 0.312 0.228 0.254 0.203 0.272 0.254 0.042 16 

PCB 205 0.0439 0.0373 0.0463 0.0437 0.0554 0.0453 0.0065 14 

PCB 206 0.369 0.254 0.253 0.301 0.209 0.277 0.061 22 

PCB 207 0.151 0.0751 0.0680 0.0604 0.0961 0.0902 0.037 41 

PCB 208 0.133 0.176 0.0782 0.0511 0.0741 0.103 0.051 50 

PCB 209 0.199 0.0907 0.131 0.103 0.155 0.136 0.043 32 

137 
Appendix 50. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at Cape Darby, Alaska 

in 2008 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value 

ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1371 1374 1377 1379 1380 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 1.68 1.23 1.38 0.996 0.704 1.20 0.37 31 

BDE99 0.909 0.971 1.30 0.869 0.897 0.989 0.18 18 

BDE100 0.810 0.797 0.744 0.758 0.697 0.761 0.045 5.9 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD 0.00957 <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 4.33 2.64 2.74 2.73 2.23 2.93 0.81 28 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.154 0.110 0.116 0.122 0.136 0.128 0.018 14 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.238 0.0984 0.290 0.194 0.227 0.210 0.071 34 

PCB 52 2.64 0.745 0.697 2.43 2.08 1.72 0.93 54 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 0.364 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 66 5.04 3.96 3.39 3.23 2.72 3.67 0.88 24 

PCB 70 1.25 0.0978 0.197 0.0648 0.111 0.343 0.51 150 

PCB 74 5.06 3.54 3.11 2.86 2.38 3.39 1.0 30 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.0293 0.0172 0.00894 0.0158 <LOD 0.0178 0.0085 48 

PCB 87 0.921 0.364 0.657 0.359 0.381 0.537 0.25 46 

PCB 92 0.897 0.393 0.154 0.838 0.625 0.582 0.31 53 

PCB 95+121 0.784 0.310 0.196 0.273 0.272 0.367 0.24 65 

PCB 99 23.9 15.2 12.4 9.41 8.45 13.9 6.2 45 

PCB 101 2.92 0.411 4.00 1.94 2.43 2.34 1.3 56 

PCB 105 6.39 4.28 3.24 2.57 2.14 3.72 1.7 46 

PCB 106 0.313 0.209 0.0108 <LOQ <LOQ 0.177 0.15 86 

PCB 107 1.23 0.350 0.316 0.203 0.153 0.450 0.44 98 

PCB 110 3.45 1.68 2.49 2.19 2.12 2.39 0.66 28 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.621 0.442 0.330 0.250 0.228 0.374 0.16 43 

PCB 118 27.3 17.4 13.2 10.4 9.02 15.5 7.3 47 

PCB 119 0.566 0.360 0.309 0.265 0.225 0.345 0.13 39 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 5.01 3.05 2.28 1.84 1.54 2.74 1.4 51 

PCB 130 1.43 0.872 0.780 0.458 0.418 0.793 0.41 52 

PCB 137 2.28 1.30 1.11 0.780 0.654 1.22 0.64 52 

PCB 138 36.2 21.4 16.8 12.8 10.6 19.6 10 52 

PCB 146 9.26 5.91 4.20 3.00 2.61 5.00 2.7 54 

PCB 149 3.59 2.35 2.46 1.69 1.75 2.37 0.77 32 

138 
Appendix 50. (Continued). 

Compound 1371 1374 1377 1379 1380 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.572 0.289 0.250 0.371 0.286 0.353 0.13 37 

PCB 153+132 71.7 43.5 34.1 24.3 20.2 38.8 21 53 

PCB 154 0.995 0.600 0.480 0.397 0.357 0.566 0.26 45 

PCB 156 2.04 1.29 0.971 0.757 0.617 1.13 0.57 50 

PCB 157 0.582 0.387 0.308 0.223 0.197 0.340 0.15 46 

PCB 158 2.31 0.935 0.917 1.04 0.591 1.16 0.66 57 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 8.29 4.63 3.64 2.96 2.34 4.37 2.3 54 

PCB 165 0.0775 0.0267 0.0234 0.0348 0.0281 0.0381 0.022 59 

PCB 166 0.138 0.104 0.0643 0.0598 0.0429 0.0817 0.038 47 

PCB 167 1.50 0.879 0.562 0.432 0.329 0.740 0.47 64 

PCB 170 5.35 2.91 2.36 1.70 1.35 2.73 1.6 58 

PCB 172 1.04 0.680 0.493 0.344 0.263 0.563 0.31 55 

PCB 174 0.362 0.228 0.273 0.154 0.194 0.242 0.080 33 

PCB 175 0.355 0.202 0.152 0.129 0.0954 0.187 0.10 55 

PCB 176 0.0205 0.0173 0.0191 0.0183 0.0160 0.0182 0.0017 9.5 

PCB 177 1.05 0.587 0.579 0.331 0.309 0.572 0.30 52 

PCB 178 1.17 0.602 0.426 0.455 0.271 0.585 0.35 60 

PCB 180+193 15.3 8.12 6.98 4.86 3.80 7.81 4.5 58 

PCB 183 5.46 3.08 2.39 1.65 1.28 2.77 1.7 60 

PCB 185 0.0597 <LOQ 0.0512 0.0250 0.0707 0.0517 0.019 38 

PCB 187 10.9 5.99 4.11 2.69 1.97 5.13 3.6 70 

PCB 188 0.0300 0.0245 0.0225 0.0204 0.0131 0.0221 0.0062 28 

PCB 189 0.202 0.150 <LOQ 0.0672 0.0490 0.117 0.072 61 

PCB 191 0.154 0.0841 0.114 0.0913 0.0518 0.0991 0.038 38 

PCB 194 1.32 0.751 0.606 0.447 0.234 0.671 0.41 61 

PCB 195 0.328 0.243 0.184 0.214 0.128 0.219 0.074 34 

PCB 196 1.96 1.37 1.13 0.946 0.807 1.24 0.45 36 

PCB 197 0.159 0.134 0.0901 0.0920 0.0632 0.108 0.038 36 

PCB 199 5.87 4.15 3.26 2.58 1.95 3.56 1.5 43 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 1.26 1.03 0.516 0.572 0.507 0.777 0.35 45 

PCB 202 0.396 0.252 0.220 0.241 0.148 0.252 0.090 36 

PCB 205 0.0953 0.0475 0.0532 0.0357 0.0252 0.0514 0.027 52 

PCB 206 0.317 0.177 0.222 0.127 0.0144 0.171 0.11 65 

PCB 207 0.149 0.104 0.0804 0.0772 0.0538 0.0928 0.036 39 

PCB 208 0.116 0.0754 0.0441 0.0611 <LOQ 0.0742 0.031 42 

PCB 209 0.148 0.135 0.140 0.140 0.0521 0.123 0.040 32 

139 
Appendix 51. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) mass 

fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at Shaktoolik South, Alaska in 2008 

(compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1401 1402 1403 1403-2 1403 Mean % difference 1404 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 1.26 1.72 1.59 1.55 1.57 2.6 2.25 1.70 0.42 24 

BDE99 0.937 0.880 0.963 0.992 0.978 -3.0 0.988 0.946 0.049 5.2 

BDE100 0.740 0.714 0.906 0.897 0.901 0.97 0.884 0.810 0.097 12 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 28+31 2.73 3.05 4.52 4.66 4.59 -3.2 5.68 4.01 1.4 34 

PCB 29 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 44 0.0660 0.163 0.0898 0.0931 0.0915 -3.6 0.0607 0.0954 0.047 50 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.232 0.182 0.393 0.396 0.394 -0.79 0.0704 0.220 0.13 61 

PCB 52 0.928 2.11 3.53 3.64 3.58 -3.3 2.51 2.28 1.1 48 

PCB 56 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 63 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 66 3.03 3.43 5.23 5.28 5.26 -1.1 6.65 4.59 1.7 37 

PCB 70 0.138 0.125 0.264 0.266 0.265 -0.69 0.0715 0.150 0.082 55 

PCB 74 2.92 3.30 4.46 4.50 4.48 -0.77 5.71 4.10 1.3 31 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.0159 0.0104 0.0119 <LOD <LOD 0.0213 0.0149 0.0049 33 

PCB 87 0.448 0.445 0.835 0.850 0.843 -1.8 0.624 0.590 0.19 32 

PCB 92 0.249 1.05 1.20 1.21 1.20 -0.30 1.33 0.959 0.49 51 

PCB 95+121 0.0859 0.610 0.319 0.321 0.320 -0.44 0.287 0.326 0.22 66 

PCB 99 11.4 15.6 17.6 17.3 17.4 2.0 24.0 17.1 5.2 31 

PCB 101 2.38 2.27 5.28 5.12 5.20 3.0 1.74 2.90 1.6 54 

PCB 105 2.62 3.64 5.50 5.80 5.65 -5.3 7.91 4.95 2.3 47 

PCB 106 <LOQ 0.333 0.130 0.131 0.131 -0.87 0.227 0.230 0.10 44 

PCB 107 0.299 0.162 0.397 0.409 0.403 -3.0 0.306 0.293 0.099 34 

PCB 110 1.85 2.29 4.19 4.32 4.25 -3.0 4.86 3.32 1.5 44 

PCB 112 <LOD <LOD 0.0105 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 114 0.271 0.372 0.592 0.602 0.597 -1.6 0.718 0.489 0.20 42 

PCB 118 11.6 15.0 20.8 21.2 21.0 -1.9 29.9 19.4 8.0 41 

PCB 119 0.296 0.301 0.451 0.441 0.446 2.1 0.582 0.406 0.14 34 

PCB 127 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 128 2.14 2.70 3.54 3.64 3.59 -2.6 4.96 3.35 1.2 37 

PCB 130 0.548 0.658 0.973 1.01 0.990 -3.6 1.30 0.873 0.34 39 

PCB 137 0.969 1.18 1.51 1.56 1.53 -3.1 2.24 1.48 0.56 38 

PCB 138 15.6 20.6 24.8 24.3 24.6 2.2 34.8 23.9 8.1 34 

PCB 146 3.98 5.04 6.04 6.33 6.19 -4.6 8.04 5.81 1.7 30 

PCB 149 1.86 2.22 2.90 2.91 2.90 -0.13 3.73 2.68 0.82 31 

140 
Appendix 51 (Continued). 

Compound 1401 1402 1403 1403-2 1403 Mean % difference 1404 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.311 0.688 0.480 0.480 0.480 0.034 0.504 0.496 0.15 31 

PCB 153+132 33.7 46.9 45.6 46.4 46.0 -1.7 64.9 47.9 13 27 

PCB 154 0.448 0.553 0.685 0.672 0.679 1.9 0.899 0.644 0.19 30 

PCB 156 0.939 1.10 1.54 1.55 1.54 -0.74 2.19 1.44 0.56 39 

PCB 157 0.295 0.357 0.460 0.451 0.455 2.0 0.661 0.442 0.16 36 

PCB 158 1.04 1.45 1.62 1.60 1.61 1.3 2.57 1.67 0.65 39 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 3.55 4.64 5.29 5.12 5.20 3.3 6.89 5.07 1.4 27 

PCB 165 0.0401 0.0392 0.0488 0.0488 0.0488 -0.13 0.0695 0.0494 0.014 29 

PCB 166 0.0857 0.0775 0.100 0.103 0.101 -2.6 0.132 0.0990 0.024 24 

PCB 167 0.553 0.672 1.08 1.11 1.10 -2.7 1.64 0.990 0.49 50 

PCB 170 2.21 2.77 3.33 3.33 3.33 0.12 4.93 3.31 1.2 35 

PCB 172 0.475 0.542 0.650 0.652 0.651 -0.29 0.902 0.642 0.19 29 

PCB 174 0.180 0.216 0.301 0.290 0.296 3.8 0.387 0.270 0.092 34 

PCB 175 0.126 0.144 0.243 0.239 0.241 1.6 0.293 0.201 0.079 39 

PCB 176 0.0222 0.0105 0.0234 0.0242 0.0238 -3.5 0.0137 0.0176 0.0064 37 

PCB 177 0.425 0.373 0.600 0.602 0.601 -0.29 0.732 0.533 0.16 31 

PCB 178 0.429 0.737 0.753 0.768 0.761 -2.0 1.22 0.787 0.33 42 

PCB 180+193 6.56 8.15 9.49 9.55 9.52 -0.64 14.0 9.55 3.2 33 

PCB 183 2.23 2.91 3.26 3.37 3.31 -3.5 4.72 3.29 1.1 32 

PCB 185 0.0303 0.0199 0.0319 0.0311 0.0315 2.6 0.0172 0.0247 0.0072 29 

PCB 187 3.50 4.53 6.00 6.54 6.27 -8.5 8.85 5.79 2.3 40 

PCB 188 0.0561 0.0206 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.29 0.0415 0.0343 0.018 52 

PCB 189 0.0772 0.0188 <LOQ 0.0593 <LOQ 0.217 0.0930 0.086 92 

PCB 191 0.0946 0.0911 0.151 0.145 0.148 3.9 0.185 0.130 0.045 35 

PCB 194 0.580 0.663 0.887 0.864 0.876 2.6 1.41 0.882 0.37 42 

PCB 195 0.257 0.187 0.260 0.265 0.263 -2.1 0.312 0.255 0.052 20 

PCB 196 1.18 1.18 1.49 1.50 1.49 -0.45 1.88 1.43 0.33 23 

PCB 197 0.0720 0.0804 0.122 0.118 0.120 3.2 0.130 0.101 0.029 28 

PCB 199 2.84 3.46 3.87 3.86 3.87 0.22 5.25 3.85 1.0 26 

PCB 200 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 201 0.815 0.766 0.740 0.752 0.746 -1.6 1.14 0.867 0.19 21 

PCB 202 0.242 0.311 0.254 0.261 0.257 -2.6 0.386 0.299 0.065 22 

PCB 205 0.0577 0.0498 0.0264 0.0244 0.0254 8.0 0.0761 0.0523 0.021 40 

PCB 206 0.0923 0.242 0.439 0.431 0.435 1.9 0.433 0.300 0.17 55 

PCB 207 0.0900 0.0767 0.0969 0.0943 0.0956 2.7 0.136 0.0996 0.026 26 

PCB 208 0.0299 0.0360 0.0576 0.0582 0.0579 -0.92 0.0807 0.0511 0.023 45 

PCB 209 0.0892 0.137 0.206 0.201 0.204 2.8 0.191 0.155 0.053 34 

141 
Appendix 52. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at Shaktoolik South, 

Alaska in 2009 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference 

value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1424 1426 1427 1428 1429 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 1.72 0.875 0.941 5.46 1.54 2.11 1.9 91 

BDE99 0.641 0.167 0.200 6.09 0.230 1.46 2.6 180 

BDE100 0.522 0.230 0.370 1.65 0.387 0.631 0.58 91 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB28+31 2.58 1.83 2.27 2.46 2.81 2.39 0.37 15 

PCB 29 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 44 0.176 0.0654 0.0698 0.132 0.0988 0.108 0.046 43 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.730 0.0635 0.0529 0.151 0.184 0.236 0.28 120 

PCB 52 3.68 0.856 1.79 1.14 1.13 1.72 1.1 67 

PCB 56 0.170 0.150 0.162 0.193 0.162 0.167 0.016 9.6 

PCB 63 0.128 0.138 0.124 0.203 0.120 0.143 0.034 24 

PCB 66 3.53 2.60 2.91 2.12 3.80 2.99 0.68 23 

PCB 70 0.102 0.0553 0.0647 0.139 0.121 0.0965 0.036 37 

PCB 74 3.21 2.50 2.50 1.76 3.20 2.63 0.60 23 

PCB 79 0.0295 0.0321 0.0272 0.0440 0.0268 0.0319 0.0071 22 

PCB 82 0.0613 0.0280 0.0329 0.0337 0.0278 0.0367 0.014 38 

PCB 87 1.08 0.364 0.378 0.625 0.567 0.602 0.29 48 

PCB 92 1.40 0.273 0.650 0.315 0.607 0.649 0.45 70 

PCB 95+121 0.750 0.0692 0.141 0.0710 0.284 0.263 0.29 110 

PCB 99 19.1 14.0 11.9 25.0 15.3 17.1 5.2 30 

PCB 101 6.49 1.34 1.29 1.71 3.17 2.80 2.2 79 

PCB 105 4.67 3.31 3.38 5.25 4.31 4.18 0.83 20 

PCB 106 0.0296 0.0286 <LOQ 0.0282 0.0445 0.0327 0.0079 24 

PCB 107 0.342 0.173 0.173 0.261 0.276 0.245 0.073 30 

PCB 110 4.07 1.46 1.57 3.82 2.72 2.73 1.2 45 

PCB 112 0.0207 0.00838 0.0112 0.0241 0.0176 0.0164 0.0065 40 

PCB 114 0.456 0.326 0.319 0.549 0.403 0.411 0.096 23 

PCB 118 17.4 13.7 12.3 21.8 16.0 16.2 3.7 23 

PCB 119 0.502 0.319 0.301 0.592 0.374 0.418 0.13 30 

PCB 127 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 128 3.03 2.29 2.00 3.69 2.71 2.74 0.66 24 

PCB 130 0.789 0.483 0.519 1.08 0.706 0.717 0.24 34 

PCB 137 1.21 0.912 0.742 1.66 1.12 1.13 0.35 31 

PCB 138 20.9 16.8 12.6 28.2 17.9 19.3 5.8 30 

PCB 146 5.08 4.05 3.19 7.49 4.75 4.91 1.6 33 

PCB 149 4.23 1.15 1.44 2.49 2.57 2.38 1.2 51 

142 
Appendix 52 (Continued). 

Compound 1424 1426 1427 1428 1429 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.921 0.0870 0.115 0.171 0.340 0.327 0.35 110 

PCB 153+132 39.7 42.3 24.7 66.3 38.7 42.4 15 36 

PCB 154 0.601 0.411 0.378 0.781 0.503 0.535 0.16 30 

PCB 156 1.09 0.817 0.719 1.56 1.07 1.05 0.33 31 

PCB 157 0.308 0.244 0.214 0.390 0.306 0.292 0.068 23 

PCB 158 1.31 1.11 0.620 1.13 1.12 1.06 0.26 24 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0124 <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 4.19 3.54 3.05 5.77 4.04 4.12 1.0 25 

PCB 165 0.0446 0.0426 0.0359 0.0455 0.0489 0.0435 0.0048 11 

PCB 166 0.231 0.0321 0.0350 0.0993 0.144 0.108 0.083 77 

PCB 167 0.857 0.653 0.576 1.00 0.855 0.789 0.17 22 

PCB 170 2.35 2.14 1.62 3.68 2.80 2.52 0.77 31 

PCB 172 0.529 0.435 0.304 0.778 0.562 0.522 0.18 34 

PCB 174 0.501 0.106 0.157 0.302 0.385 0.290 0.16 56 

PCB 175 0.220 0.153 0.131 0.277 0.212 0.199 0.058 29 

PCB 176 0.0734 0.0349 0.0362 0.0424 0.0478 0.0469 0.016 33 

PCB 177 0.743 0.311 0.486 0.849 0.586 0.595 0.21 36 

PCB 178 0.910 0.690 0.588 0.875 0.734 0.759 0.13 18 

PCB 180+193 7.67 6.53 4.52 11.5 8.16 7.68 2.6 33 

PCB 183 2.82 2.40 1.62 3.89 2.86 2.72 0.82 30 

PCB 185 0.0431 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0360 0.0395 0.0050 13 

PCB 187 6.08 3.74 3.66 8.09 5.82 5.48 1.8 34 

PCB 188 0.0386 0.0247 0.0288 0.0443 0.0374 0.0348 0.0079 23 

PCB 189 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.0257 <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 191 0.0961 0.0796 0.0651 0.136 0.0957 0.0945 0.026 28 

PCB 194 0.541 0.578 0.348 0.778 0.690 0.587 0.16 28 

PCB 195 <LOQ 0.138 0.118 0.0529 0.200 0.127 0.061 48 

PCB 196 1.11 0.887 0.662 1.69 1.26 1.12 0.39 35 

PCB 197 0.0999 0.0732 0.0591 0.139 0.100 0.0942 0.030 32 

PCB 199 3.14 2.49 1.60 5.38 3.44 3.21 1.4 44 

PCB 200 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 201 1.04 0.387 0.537 1.42 0.904 0.857 0.41 48 

PCB 202 0.374 0.391 0.234 0.504 0.348 0.370 0.097 26 

PCB 205 0.0415 0.0429 0.0400 0.0442 0.0493 0.0436 0.0036 8.2 

PCB 206 <LOQ 0.239 <LOQ 0.345 0.265 0.283 0.056 20 

PCB 207 0.0870 0.0761 0.0671 0.120 0.0926 0.0886 0.020 23 

PCB 208 <LOQ 0.139 0.0845 0.168 0.144 0.134 0.035 26 

PCB 209 0.0901 0.104 0.0689 0.120 0.110 0.0987 0.020 20 

143 
Appendix 53. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous gull eggs collected at Stuart Island, Alaska 

in 2009 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference value 

ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 1.33 2.48 1.11 2.21 1.67 1.76 0.58 33 

BDE99 0.801 0.934 0.526 0.539 0.301 0.620 0.25 40 

BDE100 2.01 1.03 1.15 0.613 0.420 1.04 0.62 59 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB28+31 0.416 2.70 0.310 2.65 3.30 1.88 1.4 75 

PCB 29 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 44 0.0598 0.0592 0.0606 0.0577 0.0763 0.0627 0.0077 12 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.0878 0.0722 0.0767 0.0699 0.519 0.165 0.20 120 

PCB 52 0.110 0.757 0.117 0.725 1.93 0.728 0.74 100 

PCB 56 0.142 0.277 0.132 0.185 0.297 0.207 0.076 37 

PCB 63 0.0526 0.0786 0.0421 0.0946 0.151 0.0838 0.043 51 

PCB 66 0.640 4.89 0.533 4.80 4.37 3.05 2.3 74 

PCB 70 0.0774 0.0589 0.0859 0.0834 0.172 0.0955 0.044 46 

PCB 74 0.496 4.80 0.401 4.66 3.51 2.77 2.2 79 

PCB 79 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 82 0.0381 0.0430 0.0321 0.0284 0.0522 0.0387 0.0094 24 

PCB 87 0.154 0.779 0.129 0.691 0.573 0.465 0.30 65 

PCB 92 0.368 0.346 0.317 0.339 0.704 0.415 0.16 39 

PCB 95+121 0.170 0.202 0.156 0.199 0.196 0.185 0.020 11 

PCB 99 2.45 35.6 1.76 32.1 13.7 17.1 16 94 

PCB 101 0.260 2.80 0.240 2.66 5.07 2.21 2.0 92 

PCB 105 0.937 6.94 0.761 6.44 4.40 3.90 2.9 75 

PCB 106 0.0189 0.201 0.0361 0.0224 0.0215 0.0600 0.079 130 

PCB 107 0.165 0.270 0.128 0.361 0.272 0.239 0.093 39 

PCB 110 <LOD 3.01 <LOD 2.79 3.81 3.20 0.54 17 

PCB 112 0.0106 0.109 0.00782 0.0336 0.0218 0.0366 0.042 110 

PCB 114 0.0690 0.720 0.0621 0.686 0.388 0.385 0.32 83 

PCB 118 3.47 30.4 2.84 28.0 15.9 16.1 13 81 

PCB 119 0.0225 0.716 0.0224 0.655 0.363 0.356 0.33 93 

PCB 127 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 128 0.656 6.83 0.528 6.28 2.70 3.40 3.0 89 

PCB 130 0.127 2.29 0.110 2.13 0.586 1.05 1.1 100 

PCB 137 0.162 3.24 0.139 3.01 1.03 1.52 1.5 100 

PCB 138 4.01 52.1 3.23 45.4 17.4 24.4 23 94 

PCB 146 1.27 12.8 1.00 11.8 4.31 6.24 5.7 91 

PCB 149 0.540 4.81 0.455 4.46 2.41 2.53 2.1 82 

144 
Appendix 53 (Continued). 

Compound 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.244 0.0945 0.201 0.0901 0.0635 0.139 0.079 57 

PCB 153+132 10.7 98.7 8.44 90.4 33.8 48.4 43 90 

PCB 154 0.138 1.33 0.115 1.20 0.460 0.649 0.58 90 

PCB 156 0.304 2.46 0.259 2.24 1.10 1.27 1.0 82 

PCB 157 0.0888 2.29 0.0801 2.22 0.306 0.999 1.2 120 

PCB 158 0.185 2.41 0.220 2.16 1.01 1.20 1.1 88 

PCB 159 <LOQ 0.00278 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 1.07 10.4 0.880 9.73 3.32 5.08 4.7 92 

PCB 165 0.0390 0.109 0.0368 0.0916 0.317 0.119 0.12 97 

PCB 166 0.104 0.303 0.0579 0.337 0.0751 0.175 0.13 76 

PCB 167 0.260 1.96 0.204 1.83 0.875 1.03 0.84 82 

PCB 170 1.07 8.61 0.915 7.83 2.51 4.19 3.7 89 

PCB 172 0.189 1.80 0.158 1.68 0.479 0.862 0.81 94 

PCB 174 0.155 0.690 0.127 0.660 0.333 0.393 0.27 69 

PCB 175 0.0598 0.739 0.0481 0.686 0.185 0.344 0.34 99 

PCB 176 0.0384 0.0449 0.0369 0.0393 0.0391 0.0397 0.0031 7.7 

PCB 177 0.491 2.46 0.377 2.34 0.379 1.21 1.1 90 

PCB 178 0.451 1.66 0.336 1.57 0.524 0.907 0.65 71 

PCB 180+193 3.39 25.7 2.67 24.0 7.37 12.6 11 90 

PCB 183 0.949 8.90 0.707 8.39 2.47 4.28 4.0 94 

PCB 185 <LOQ 0.0231 <LOQ 0.0207 0.0241 0.0226 0.0018 7.7 

PCB 187 1.91 20.0 1.36 18.9 4.66 9.38 9.3 99 

PCB 188 0.0197 0.0617 0.0193 0.0586 0.0255 0.0369 0.021 58 

PCB 189 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 0.245 0.105 0.175 0.099 56 

PCB 191 0.0401 0.264 0.0390 0.246 0.0916 0.136 0.11 81 

PCB 194 0.509 1.82 0.422 1.70 0.642 1.02 0.68 67 

PCB 195 0.0526 0.543 0.0504 0.519 0.197 0.272 0.24 89 

PCB 196 0.754 3.24 0.609 3.18 1.17 1.79 1.3 73 

PCB 197 0.0467 0.263 0.0457 0.259 0.0858 0.140 0.11 80 

PCB 199 2.05 12.6 1.56 12.2 2.88 6.26 5.6 90 

PCB 200 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 201 0.523 2.82 0.373 2.84 0.631 1.44 1.3 89 

PCB 202 0.194 0.702 0.181 0.691 0.228 0.399 0.27 68 

PCB 205 <LOQ 0.0801 <LOQ 0.0967 0.0398 0.0722 0.029 41 

PCB 206 0.248 0.456 0.212 0.477 0.233 0.326 0.13 40 

PCB 207 0.0591 0.214 0.0542 0.219 0.0921 0.128 0.082 65 

PCB 208 0.101 0.176 0.104 0.291 0.126 0.160 0.080 50 

PCB 209 0.119 0.220 0.0713 0.239 0.0822 0.146 0.078 53 

145 
Appendix 54. Brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 

mass fractions (ng g-1 wet mass) in glaucous-winged gull eggs collected at Aiktak Island, 

Alaska in 2009 (compounds shown in red and blue were above and below reference 

value ranges, respectively). 

Compound 1473 1474 1475 1477 1478 Mean SD RSD 

BDE47 0.477 4.90 0.906 2.52 1.78 2.12 1.7 82 

BDE99 0.0797 0.990 0.328 0.353 0.200 0.390 0.35 90 

BDE100 0.231 1.32 0.431 0.653 0.471 0.620 0.42 67 

PCB 8 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 18 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB28+31 0.419 1.44 1.02 2.04 1.75 1.33 0.64 48 

PCB 29 <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD <LOD 

PCB 44 0.122 0.0581 0.103 0.167 0.0846 0.107 0.041 38 

PCB 45 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 49 0.134 0.0844 0.134 0.187 0.0649 0.121 0.048 40 

PCB 52 0.436 0.584 1.07 0.725 0.412 0.645 0.27 42 

PCB 56 0.149 0.228 0.195 0.212 0.213 0.199 0.030 15 

PCB 63 0.0722 0.168 0.0955 0.106 0.0613 0.101 0.042 41 

PCB 66 0.556 4.14 1.38 2.94 2.92 2.39 1.4 59 

PCB 70 0.0783 0.0686 0.0614 0.0759 0.0767 0.0722 0.0071 9.8 

PCB 74 0.428 3.28 1.02 2.40 2.17 1.86 1.1 61 

PCB 79 0.0287 0.0275 0.0256 0.0294 0.0250 0.0272 0.0019 7.1 

PCB 82 0.0295 0.0284 0.0336 0.0293 0.0314 0.0304 0.0021 6.9 

PCB 87 0.153 0.600 0.214 0.500 0.352 0.364 0.19 52 

PCB 92 0.184 0.224 0.356 0.424 0.168 0.271 0.11 42 

PCB 95+121 0.162 0.135 0.204 0.240 0.113 0.171 0.051 30 

PCB 99 2.65 25.6 5.99 14.6 12.5 12.3 8.9 72 

PCB 101 0.754 0.573 1.56 2.23 0.600 1.14 0.73 64 

PCB 105 0.645 6.42 1.48 3.56 3.13 3.05 2.2 73 

PCB 106 <LOQ 0.0195 0.0385 0.0230 0.0183 0.0248 0.0093 38 

PCB 107 0.0783 0.106 0.0868 0.0966 0.112 0.0960 0.014 14 

PCB 110 0.325 0.634 1.01 0.902 0.573 0.689 0.27 40 

PCB 112 0.00844 0.0212 0.0115 0.0329 0.0150 0.0178 0.0097 54 

PCB 114 0.0737 0.733 0.147 0.348 0.335 0.327 0.26 78 

PCB 118 2.84 28.1 6.14 14.5 13.2 13.0 9.8 75 

PCB 119 0.0506 0.635 0.157 0.383 0.325 0.310 0.22 72 

PCB 127 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 128 0.535 5.35 1.11 2.65 2.33 2.39 1.9 78 

PCB 130 0.243 0.740 0.375 0.656 0.646 0.532 0.21 40 

PCB 137 0.235 2.34 0.446 0.973 0.966 0.992 0.82 83 

PCB 138 4.62 37.6 8.46 19.3 18.9 17.8 13 72 

PCB 146 1.18 7.08 2.57 5.40 4.79 4.20 2.3 56 

PCB 149 0.558 1.36 1.34 1.23 0.875 1.07 0.35 33 

146 
Appendix 54 (Continued). 

Compound 1473 1474 1475 1477 1478 Mean SD RSD 

PCB 151 0.100 0.138 0.223 0.165 0.0694 0.139 0.059 43 

PCB 153+132 9.48 94.9 19.9 43.3 39.8 41.5 33 80 

PCB 154 0.146 1.17 0.279 0.642 0.512 0.550 0.40 72 

PCB 156 0.180 2.17 0.439 0.909 0.948 0.928 0.76 82 

PCB 157 0.0725 0.618 0.127 0.266 0.249 0.267 0.21 80 

PCB 158 0.299 2.15 0.576 1.37 1.18 1.12 0.72 65 

PCB 159 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 163 0.881 5.80 1.98 3.89 3.28 3.17 1.9 59 

PCB 165 0.0337 0.105 0.0457 0.0706 0.0698 0.0649 0.027 42 

PCB 166 0.0276 0.0404 0.0340 0.0316 0.0359 0.0339 0.0048 14 

PCB 167 0.184 1.94 0.419 0.876 0.872 0.858 0.67 79 

PCB 170 0.715 6.74 1.08 2.82 2.97 2.87 2.4 83 

PCB 172 0.138 1.22 0.325 0.572 0.601 0.572 0.41 72 

PCB 174 0.0788 0.165 0.195 0.209 0.121 0.154 0.054 35 

PCB 175 0.0657 0.521 0.123 0.225 0.224 0.232 0.18 76 

PCB 176 0.0333 0.0317 0.0423 0.0386 0.0462 0.0384 0.0061 16 

PCB 177 0.207 0.757 0.469 0.498 0.384 0.463 0.20 43 

PCB 178 0.219 1.37 0.346 0.713 0.496 0.628 0.45 72 

PCB 180+193 2.15 24.3 4.53 8.41 9.33 9.75 8.7 89 

PCB 183 0.719 7.66 1.54 3.19 3.04 3.23 2.7 83 

PCB 185 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 187 1.36 8.35 3.57 5.99 5.05 4.86 2.6 54 

PCB 188 0.0196 0.0449 0.0256 0.0270 0.0312 0.0297 0.0095 32 

PCB 189 <LOQ 0.0116 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 191 0.0263 0.264 0.0455 0.105 0.113 0.111 0.093 84 

PCB 194 0.255 2.37 0.475 0.787 1.01 0.979 0.83 85 

PCB 195 0.0665 0.572 0.140 0.257 0.274 0.262 0.19 74 

PCB 196 0.468 3.62 0.829 1.45 1.50 1.57 1.2 78 

PCB 197 0.0302 0.283 0.0723 0.120 0.102 0.121 0.096 79 

PCB 199 0.918 11.2 2.18 2.95 3.38 4.12 4.0 98 

PCB 200 <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ <LOQ 

PCB 201 0.218 1.91 0.680 0.788 0.671 0.854 0.63 74 

PCB 202 0.148 0.567 0.203 0.322 0.233 0.295 0.16 56 

PCB 205 0.0273 0.103 0.0369 0.0298 0.0720 0.0539 0.033 61 

PCB 206 <LOQ 0.768 <LOQ 0.333 0.339 0.480 0.25 52 

PCB 207 0.0624 0.268 0.0799 0.139 0.141 0.138 0.081 58 

PCB 208 0.0970 0.306 0.108 0.142 0.138 0.158 0.085 53 

PCB 209 0.0601 0.361 0.0795 0.201 0.193 0.179 0.12 67 

147