## 3 Results and Discussion
### Uptake Experiment
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Sample** & **Exposure** & **Mass of Uptake** & **pH of Uptake** & **\$ GEM** & **\$ Temperature** & **\$ Relative** & **\$ Hig\({}^{a}\)\({}_{\text{Mg}}\)** & **\$1 Hg\({}^{a}\)\({}_{\text{Mg}}\)** \\  & **Duration** & **Solution** & **Solution** & **Concentration** & **Pressure** & **\$1 Hg\({}^{a}\)\({}_{\text{Mg}}\)** & **\$1 Hg\({}^{a}\)\({}_{\text{Mg}}\)** \\ \hline  & **(min)** & **[**g**]** & & **(ng m\({}^{-3}\))** & **(R)** & **(Pa)** & **(ng L\({}^{-1}\))** & **(ng L\({}^{-1}\))** \\ \hline Pure water & 60 & 499.7 & \({}^{\circ}\)6.1-6.5 & 153 \(\pm\) 9 & 299.2 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 0.70 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 13.7 & 308 \\ Pure water & 153 & 500 & \({}^{\circ}\)6.1-6.5 & 124 \(\pm\) 3 & 298.4 \(\pm\) 0.4 & 1.29 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 121.2 & 170.9 \\ Pure water & 181 & 500.6 & \({}^{\circ}\)6.1-6.5 & 1312 \(\pm\) 0.8 & 2991 \(\pm\) 0.3 & 1.2 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 279.5 & 268.7 \\ Pure water & 241 & 499.7 & \({}^{\circ}\)6.1-6.5 & 116 \(\pm\) 3 & 297.1 \(\pm\) 0.3 & 1.1 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 184.4 & 263 \\ dilute H\({}_{2}\)SO\({}_{4}\) & 122 & 500.3 & 3.3 & 100 \(\pm\) 10 & 2952 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 1.02 \(\pm\) 0.08 & 58.8 & 614.6 \\ dilute H\({}_{2}\)SO\({}_{4}\) & 60 & 502.2 & 324 & 105 \(\pm\) 6 & 2934 \(\pm\) 0.4 & 1.6 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 504.4 & 335.2 \\ dilute H\({}_{2}\)SO\({}_{4}\) & 238 & 500.3 & 3.25 & 110 \(\pm\) 3 & 2973 \(\pm\) 0.3 & 1.32 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 83.7 & 742.2 \\ dilute H\({}_{2}\)SO\({}_{4}\) & 30 & 500.4 & 3.3 & 102 \(\pm\) 8 & 2926 \(\pm\) 0.5 & 1.30 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 30.7 & 157.6 \\ dilute H\({}_{2}\)SO\({}_{4}\) & 180 & 500.1 & 3.2 & 112 \(\pm\) 2 & 2942 \(\pm\) 0.5 & 1.29 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 48 & 918.4 \\ dilute H\({}_{2}\)SO\({}_{4}\) & 240 & 500 & 3.27 & 110 \(\pm\) 3 & 2956 \(\pm\) 0.6 & 1.30 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 164.4 & 798.1 \\ dilute HNO\({}_{2}\) & 120 & 499.6 & 3.59 & 1081 \(\pm\) 0.5 & 29415 \(\pm\) 0.01 & 1.1 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 156.9 & 164.6 \\ dilute HNO\({}_{3}\) & 180 & 500.5 & 3.64 & 1146 \(\pm\) 0.9 & 2957 \(\pm\) 0.5 & 1.1 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 258 & 198.7 \\ dilute HNO\({}_{3}\) & 236 & 500.7 & 3.5 & 106 \(\pm\) 2 & 2931 \(\pm\) 0.3 & 1.3 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 117.7 & 379.8 \\ dilute HNO\({}_{3}\) & 60 & 500.2 & 3.6 & 1094 \(\pm\) 0.8 & 2952 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 1.2 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 151.8 & 220 \\ seawater & 299 & 500 & 8.11 & 1133 \(\pm\) 0.6 & 2964 \(\pm\) 0.4 & 1.2 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 1948.8 & 52.6 \\ seawater & 190 & 501.4 & 7.92 & 107 \(\pm\) 3 & 2942 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 1.1 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 223.5 & \({}^{*}\)LPL \\ seawater & 120 & 489.9 & 7.97 & 101 \(\pm\) 3 & 295.0 \(\pm\) 0.5 & 1.30 \(\pm\) 0.01 & 262.7 & 65.5 \\ seawater & 60 & 499.8 & 7.95 & 1154 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 2956 \(\pm\) 0.5 & 1.03 \(\pm\) 0.09 & 219.2 & 70.9 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{5}\) Values shown are the average \(\pm\) SD. \({}^{*}\) Values are the range typically observed for blank samples of pure water. \({}^{1}\) Recovery yield correction (division by 0.88) was made for the concentrations of Hg\({}^{a}\)\({}_{\text{Mg}}\) and Hg\({}^{a}\)\({}_{\text{Mg}}\) lower than 517 pg L\({}^{-1}\), corresponding to 150 pg in 290 mL. \({}^{*}\)LPL = lower than the detection limit.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Results of GEM uptake experiments by variety of bulk solutions. The results of the uptake experiments on GEM by pure water, seawater and acidified pure water with sulfuric or nitric acid showed that the \(\text{Hg}^{0}_{\text{aq}}\) concentrations in the uptake solutions were lower than the amount of \(\text{Hg}^{0}_{\text{aq}}\) estimated for the equilibrated solution with the GEM standard gas, according to the [PERSON]'s law (Figure 3). In the estimation of the equilibrated concentration, we used the average Henry's constants at 293 K and 298 K provided in the reference data report [7], which are approximately 394 bar and 476 bar, respectively, together with the quantity of the exposed solutions, GEM concentrations and temperature observed during the experiments (Table 2). The regression plots for all solutions demonstrated no significant time dependency.