<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ACP</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ACP</abbrev-journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Chem. Phys.</abbrev-journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub">1680-7324</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>

    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-17-2393-2017</article-id><title-group><article-title>Trend of atmospheric mercury concentrations at Cape Point <?xmltex \hack{\break}?> for 1995–2004 and since 2007</article-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Trend of atmospheric mercury concentrations at Cape Point}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{L.~G.~Martin et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Martin</surname><given-names>Lynwill G.</given-names></name>
          <email>lynwill.martin@weathersa.co.za</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Labuschagne</surname><given-names>Casper</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7125-0029</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Brunke</surname><given-names>Ernst-Günther</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff4">
          <name><surname>Weigelt</surname><given-names>Andreas</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Ebinghaus</surname><given-names>Ralf</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Slemr</surname><given-names>Franz</given-names></name>
          <email>franz.slemr@mpic.de</email>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>South African Weather Service c/o CSIR, P.O. Box 320, Stellenbosch 7599, South Africa</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Helmholtz-Zentrum Geesthacht (HZG), Institute of Coastal Research, Max-Planck-Strasse 1, 21502 Geesthacht, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, Hahn-Meitner-Weg 1, 55128 Mainz, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>a</label><institution>now at: Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency (BSH), 22589 Hamburg, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Lynwill G. Martin (lynwill.martin@weathersa.co.za) and Franz Slemr (franz.slemr@mpic.de)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>15</day><month>February</month><year>2017</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>17</volume>
      <issue>3</issue>
      <fpage>2393</fpage><lpage>2399</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>12</day><month>October</month><year>2016</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>24</day><month>October</month><year>2016</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>23</day><month>January</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>25</day><month>January</month><year>2017</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
<license license-type="open-access">
<license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/</ext-link></license-p>
</license>
</permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/17/2393/2017/acp-17-2393-2017.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/17/2393/2017/acp-17-2393-2017.html</self-uri>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/17/2393/2017/acp-17-2393-2017.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/17/2393/2017/acp-17-2393-2017.pdf</self-uri>


      <abstract>
    <p>Long-term measurements of gaseous elemental mercury (GEM) concentrations at
Cape Point, South Africa, reveal a downward trend between September 1995 and
December 2005 and an upward one from March 2007 until June 2015, implying a
change in trend sign between 2004 and 2007. The trend change is
qualitatively consistent with the trend changes in GEM concentrations
observed at Mace Head, Ireland, and in mercury wet deposition over North
America, suggesting a change in worldwide mercury emissions.</p>
    <p>Seasonally resolved trends suggest a modulation of the overall trend by
regional processes. The trends in absolute terms (downward in 1995–2004
and upward in 2007–2015) are highest in austral spring (SON),
coinciding with the peak in emissions from biomass burning in South America
and southern Africa. The influence of trends in biomass burning is further
supported by a biennial variation in GEM concentration found here and an
El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) signature in GEM concentrations reported recently.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>Mercury and especially methyl mercury which bio-accumulates in the aquatic
nutritional chain are harmful to humans and animals (e.g., Mergler et al.,
2007; Scheuhammer et al., 2007; Selin, 2009; and references therein).
Mercury, released into the environment by natural processes and by
anthropogenic activities, cycles between the atmosphere, water, and land
reservoirs (Selin et al., 2008). In the atmosphere, mercury occurs mostly as
gaseous elemental mercury (GEM), which with an atmospheric lifetime of 0.5–1 year
can be transported over large distances (Lindberg et al., 2007).
Mercury is thus a pollutant of global importance and as such on the priority
list of several international agreements and conventions dealing with
environmental protection and human health, including the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) Minamata Convention on Mercury (<uri>www.mercuryconvention.org</uri>).</p>
      <p>Because of fast mixing processes in the atmosphere, monitoring of
tropospheric mercury concentrations and of its deposition will thus be the
most straightforward way to verify the decrease of mercury emissions
expected from the implementation of the Minamata Convention. Regular
monitoring of atmospheric mercury started in the mid-1990s with the
establishment of mercury monitoring networks in North America (Temme et al.,
2007; Prestbo and Gay, 2009; Gay et al., 2013). Until 2010 only a few
long-term mercury observations had been reported from other regions of the
Northern Hemisphere and hardly any from the Southern Hemisphere (Sprovieri
et al., 2010). The Global Mercury Observation System (GMOS, <uri>www.gmos.eu</uri>) was
established in 2010 to extend the mercury monitoring network, especially in
the Southern Hemisphere (Sprovieri et al., 2016).</p>
      <p>Decreasing atmospheric mercury concentrations and wet mercury deposition
have been reported for most sites in the Northern Hemisphere (Temme et al.,
2007; Prestbo and Gay, 2009; Ebinghaus et al., 2011; Gay et al., 2013). At
Cape Point, the only site in the Southern Hemisphere with a long-term record
exceeding a decade, decreasing mercury concentrations were also observed
between 1996 and 2004 (Slemr et al., 2008). The worldwide decreasing trend
has been at odds with increasing mercury emissions in most inventories
(Muntean et al., 2014, and references therein). Soerensen et al. (2012)
thought that decreasing mercury concentrations in seawater of the North
Atlantic were responsible for the decrease, at least in the Northern
Hemisphere. The most recent inventories, however, attribute the decrease of
atmospheric mercury concentrations to a decrease in mercury emissions since
1990 (Zhang et al., 2016). The decrease in mercury emissions was attributed
to the decrease of emissions from commercial products, to changing speciation
of emission from coal-fired power plants, and to the improved estimate of
mercury emissions from artisanal mining. According to Zhang et al. (2016)
worldwide anthropogenic emissions decreased from 2890 Mg year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in
1990 to 2160 Mg year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2000 and increased slightly to 2280 Mg year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2010.</p>
      <p>In the first approximation, the observed trends in atmospheric mercury
should follow these changes. There is indeed some recent evidence that the
downward trend in the Northern Hemisphere is slowing or even turning upwards
(Weigelt et al., 2015; Weiss-Penzias et al., 2016). Here we report and
analyze the trends of atmospheric mercury concentrations at the Global Atmospheric Watch
(GAW) station Cape Point between 1995 and 2004 and from March 2007 until June 2015.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Experimental</title>
      <p>The Cape Point site (CPT, 34<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>21<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, 18<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>29<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E)
is operated as one of the GAW baseline monitoring observatories of the World Meteorological
Organization (WMO). The station is located on the southern tip of the Cape
Peninsula within the Cape Point National Park on top of a peak 230 m above
sea level and about 60 km south from Cape Town. The station has been in
operation since the end of the 1970s, and its current continuous measurement
portfolio includes Hg, CO, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn>222</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>Rn, and
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, as well as several halocarbons, particles, and meteorological parameters. The
station receives clean marine air masses for most of the time. Occasional
events with continental and polluted air can easily be filtered out using a
combination of CO and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn>222</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>Rn measurements (Brunke et al., 2004). Based
on the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn>222</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>Rn <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 250 mBq m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> criterion about 35 % of the data
are classified annually as baseline.</p>
      <p>Gaseous elemental mercury (GEM) was measured by a manual amalgamation
technique (Slemr et al., 2008) between September 1995 and December 2004 and
by the automated Tekran 2537B instrument (Tekran Inc., Toronto, Canada)
beginning March 2007. Typically, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 13 measurements per month were
made using the manual technique, each covering 3 h sampling time. The manual
technique was compared with the Tekran technique in an international
intercomparison (Ebinghaus et al., 1999) and provided comparable results.</p>
      <p>Beginning March 2007 GEM was measured using an automated dual-channel,
single-amalgamation, cold-vapor atomic fluorescence analyzer (Tekran Model
2537A or B analyzer, Tekran Inc., Toronto, Canada). The instrument utilized two gold
cartridges. While one is adsorbing mercury during a sampling period, the
other is being thermally desorbed using argon as a carrier gas. Mercury is
detected using cold-vapor atomic fluorescence spectroscopy (CVAFS). The
functions of the cartridges are then interchanged, allowing continuous
sampling of the incoming air stream. Operation and calibration of the
instruments follow established and standardized procedures of the GMOS
(<uri>www.gmos.eu</uri>) project. The instrument was
run with 15 min sampling frequency, while 30 min averages were used for the
data analysis. All mercury concentrations reported here are given in units of nanogram per square meter (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) at 273.14 K and 1013 hPa.</p>
      <p>The Mann–Kendal test for trend detection and an estimate of
Sen's slope were made using the program by Salmi et al. (2002).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Results and discussion</title>
      <p>The upper panel of Fig. 1 shows monthly average GEM concentrations
calculated from all data from March 2007 until June 2015, and in the lower
panel monthly average GEM concentrations were calculated from baseline data,
i.e., GEM concentrations measured at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn>222</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>Rn concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn>250</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mBq m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.
The slope of the least-squares fit of all data (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.0222</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0032</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is not significantly different from the slope
calculated from the baseline data only (0.0219 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.0032 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Sen's slope and trend significance for all
(0.0210 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and baseline (0.0208 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
data are listed in Table 1. Sen's slopes tend to be somewhat
lower than the slopes from the least-squares fits, but they are in agreement
within their 95 % uncertainty range. All trends are highly significant,
i.e., at a level <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn>99.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %. The results are essentially the same whether
monthly median or monthly average concentrations are used. This shows that
the trend is robust and not influenced by occasional pollution or depletion
events (Brunke et al., 2010, 2012).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><caption><p>Monthly average GEM concentrations and their least-squares fit:
upper panel – all data; lower panel – baseline data (i.e., only GEM
concentrations at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn>222</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>Rn concentrations <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 250 mBq m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/17/2393/2017/acp-17-2393-2017-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p>For comparison we also calculated the trends for the manually measured GEM
concentrations during the period September 1995–December 2004.
These data have an annual coverage of only about 300 h per year, i.e.,
about 3 % in contrast to the Tekran measurements from 2007 onward, for which the
coverage was nearly 100 %. Baseline data were not filtered out from this
data set because (a) on average only 13 measurements were available per month
and (b) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn>222</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>Rn was measured only since March 1999 and thus cannot be used
as a criterion for the whole period. In Table 2 we list the trends calculated
from the least-squares fit of the monthly medians. Monthly averages provide
qualitatively the same trends with lower significance, because of their
larger sensitivity to extreme GEM concentrations. The trend of all monthly
medians of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0176</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0027</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is somewhat higher
than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.015</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.003</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Slemr et al., 2008)
calculated from the 1996 and 1999–2004 annual averages but is within the
uncertainty of both calculations.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Sen's slopes calculated from monthly GEM averages of all and
baseline (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn>222</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>Rn <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 250 mBq m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> data for March
2007–June 2015.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Data</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Sen's slope</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Significance</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Range at 95 % signif. level</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">[ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>]</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">[%]</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">[ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">All data</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0210</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">99</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">&gt; 99.98</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0127–0.0284</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">All Baseline</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0208</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">97</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">&gt; 99.98</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0141–0.0280</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Fall (MAM, all data)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0089</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">27</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">95.99</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.0009–0.0198</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Fall (MAM, baseline)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0108</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">27</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">98.78</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0018–0.0223</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Winter (JJA, all data)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0153</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">25</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">99.29</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0025–0.0294</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Winter (JJA, baseline)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0152</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">25</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">98.68</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0020–0.0287</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Spring (SON, all data)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0375</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">24</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">99.74</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0142–0.0556</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Spring (SON, baseline)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0361</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">24</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">99.84</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0160–0.0563</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Summer (DJF, all data)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0287</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">23</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">99.87</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0119–0.0440</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Summer (DJF, baseline)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0269</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">21</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">99.79</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0020–0.0287</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><caption><p>Least-squares fit of monthly median of all GEM concentrations for
September 1995–December 2004.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Data</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Slope</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Signif. level</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">[ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>]</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">[%]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">All data</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.0176 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.0027</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">94</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mn>99.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Fall (MAM)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.0132 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.0052</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">23</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mn>95</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Winter (JJA)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0189</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0049</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">23</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mn>99.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Spring (SON)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0198</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0038</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">24</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mn>99.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Summer (DJF)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0154</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0065</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">24</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">&gt; 95</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p>The upward trend after March 2007 and the downward trend between 1995 and
2004 were measured by different techniques: the former one with a Tekran
instrument and the latter one using the manual technique. For reasons
outside of our control we could not operate both techniques side by side for
a reasonable length of time. Although the measurements by both techniques
agreed well during an international field intercomparison (Ebinghaus et al.,
1999), we do not claim here that they are comparable without an extended
intercomparison of both techniques at Cape Point. Assuming internal
consistency of each of the data sets, it is, however, obvious that the
decreasing trend between 1995 and 2004 turned to an increasing one from
2007 onward, implying that the turning point was located between 2004 and 2007.</p>
      <p>The trend reversal at Cape Point is the most pronounced but not the only
evidence that the hemispheric trends in mercury concentrations are changing.
An analysis of 1996–2013 data from Mace Head, classified according to the
geographical origin of the air masses, showed (a) that the downward trend of
mercury concentration in air masses originating from over the Atlantic Ocean
south of 28<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N is substantially lower than for all other classes
originating north of 28<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and (b) that all downward trends for air
masses originating from north of 28<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N are decelerating (Weigelt
et al., 2015). The apparent inconsistency that no decelerating trend for air
masses from south of 28<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N was found can be explained by the fact
that the changes of a smaller trend are likely to be more difficult to
detect. Weiss-Penzias et al. (2016) recently reported that the wet mercury
deposition was decreasing at 53 % of the sites in the US and Canada and
was increasing at none of the sites over the period 1997–2013. Over the
period 2008–2013, however, the mercury wet deposition was decreasing only at
6 % of the sites but was increasing at 30 % of the sites. Thus the sign
change of the trend at Cape Point somewhere between 2004 and 2007 is just
one more indication that trends in atmospheric mercury concentrations are
changing world-wide.</p>
      <p>Trends in mercury concentrations and mercury wet deposition are most likely
related to changes in worldwide emission (Pacyna et al., 2016). Most
anthropogenic emission inventories show nearly constant or increasing
anthropogenic emissions between 1990 and 2010 (Wilson et al., 2010; Streets
et al., 2011; Muntean et al., 2014), which is inconsistent with the worldwide
decreasing trend in atmospheric mercury concentrations and mercury wet
deposition over this period. This inconsistency has been explained by
decreasing emissions from the North Atlantic Ocean due to reduced mercury
concentrations in subsurface ocean water (Soerensen et al., 2012) and more
recently by a substantial reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired
power plants and from commercial products between 1990 and 2000 (Zhang et
al., 2016). The most recent inventory by Zhang et al. (2016) estimated that
worldwide anthropogenic emissions decreased from 2890 Mg year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in
1990 to 2160 Mg year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2000 and increased slightly to 2280 Mg year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
in 2010. To the best of our knowledge no more recent emission
estimates have been published so far (the emission estimates are always
delayed by several years, needed for the collection of the underlying
statistical data). Since the potential to reduce emissions from the
commercial products and from coal-fired power plants was largely exhausted
between 1990 and 2000, a further increase of worldwide mercury emissions
between 2010 and 2015, mostly from increasing coal burning and artisanal
small-scale gold mining, can be expected.</p>
      <p>Seasonally resolved trends may provide some information about the processes
influencing the trends at Cape Point. The trends were calculated for
different seasons (austral fall – March, April, May; winter – June, July,
August; spring – September, October, November; and summer – December,
January, February) for the period from March 2007 until June 2015 from all
and baseline data. These are listed in Table 1. Although the 95 %
uncertainty ranges of seasonal Sen's slopes overlap, the
least-squares fit slopes for different seasons are statistically different at
the &gt; 99 % significance level. Irrespective of whether monthly
averages or medians, least-squares fit, or Sen's slope are
used, a consistent picture emerges with upward trends where the slopes
decrease in the following order: austral spring (SON) &gt; summer
(DJF) &gt; winter (JJA) &gt; fall (MAM). Seasonal trends for
the 1995–2004 period shown in Table 2 are all downward, and their slopes
decrease in the following order: austral fall &gt; summer &gt; winter &gt; spring
(note the negative sign of the
slopes). The difference between fall and summer as well as between winter
and spring is not significant. In absolute terms the slope is smallest during austral
autumn (MAM) and highest for spring (SON) for both the 1995–2004 and 2007–2015 data sets.</p>
      <p>The difference in seasonal GEM trends could originate from the seasonal
trends of GEM emissions. Hg emissions from coal-fired power plants, the
largest anthropogenic Hg source, tend to be nearly constant over the year
(Rotty, 1987). However, biomass burning is a highly seasonal
phenomenon with maximum emissions during August–September both in
South America and southern Africa (Duncan et al., 2003; van der Werf et al., 2006).
Taking into account a delay by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3 months due to intra-hemispherical
air mixing time, October–November coincides with the maximum absolute
seasonal trends: an upward one for 2007–2015 and a downward one for the
1995–2004 period. Biomass burning emission inventories suggest a small
decrease in CO emissions from Africa and a more pronounced one from South
America between 1997 and 2004, but differences between different inventories
render it very uncertain (Granier et al., 2011). As the emission estimates by
Granier et al. (2011) end in 2010, no trend in emissions from biomass burning
in the 2007–2015 period can be given. Nonetheless, the ambient Cape Point CO
data have shown a measurable decrease during 2003 till 2014 (Toihir et al.,
2015). We tried to calculate seasonal trends of baseline CO mixing ratios for
the 1995–2004 and 2007–June 2015 periods, but none of the trends was
significant. The 1995–2004 and 2007–June 2015 periods are probably too
short to reveal trends in CO data obscured by strong seasonal and interannual
variations. Nevertheless, the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) signature both in Hg and CO data from Cape
Point, Mace Head, and CARIBIC was found to be consistent, within large
uncertainty margins, with emissions from biomass burning (Slemr et al.,
2016). In summary, seasonal variations of emissions from biomass burning in
southern Africa and South America as well as ENSO signature are consistent with a
hypothesis of emissions from biomass burning as a major driving force behind
the different seasonal trends as seen in the Cape Point data.</p>
      <p>Seasonal variation of mercury concentrations was also investigated. For this
we detrended the monthly averages using their least-squares fits. The
detrended monthly averages were then averaged according to months. Figure 2a
shows the seasonal variation of relative monthly averages with their
respective standard error. No systematical seasonal variation is apparent in
this plot. We noted, however, a 2-year periodicity in the monthly
averages. Figure 2b shows the monthly averages of the detrended monthly
values for a 2-year period. Despite the somewhat higher standard errors of
the monthly averages (number of averaged months for biennial variation being
only half of those for the seasonal variation), the monthly averages vary
between 0.95 and 1.05, as do the monthly averages for the seasonal variation
(Fig. 1a). Taken collectively, however, the relative GEM concentrations
during the second year are significantly (&gt; 99.9 %) higher than
those in the first year. This is a clear sign of a biennial variation of GEM
concentrations at Cape Point.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><caption><p>Seasonal (upper panel) and biennial (lower panel) variation of
detrended monthly averages. The error bars denote the standard error of the
monthly average.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/17/2393/2017/acp-17-2393-2017-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p>Tropospheric biennial oscillations (TBOs) in tropospheric temperature,
pressure, wind field, monsoon, etc. has been previously reported in the
literature (e.g., Meehl, 1997; Meehl and Arblaster, 2001, 2002; Zheng and
Liang, 2005). Meehl and Arblaster (2001) also report that TBOs with roughly a
2–3-year period encompass most ENSO years with their well-known
biennial tendency. Slemr et al. (2016) analyzed mercury data from Cape Point
in South Africa, Mace Head in Ireland, and CARIBIC measurements in the
upper troposphere and found an ENSO signature in all these data sets. Thus
the finding of biennial variation of GEM concentrations at Cape Point is
consistent with the ENSO influence.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p>We report here an upward trend for mercury concentrations at Cape Point for
the period 2007–2015. As mercury concentrations at Cape Point decreased
over the period 1995–2004, we conclude that the trend must have changed
sign between 2004 and 2007. Such a change is qualitatively consistent with
the trend changes observed in atmospheric mercury concentrations at Mace
Head in the Northern Hemisphere (Weigelt et al., 2015) and in mercury wet
deposition at sites in North America (Weiss-Penzias et al., 2016). Combining
all this evidence, it seems that the worldwide mercury emissions are now
increasing, after a decade or two of decreasing emissions. This finding is
consistent with the temporal development of mercury emissions in the most
recent mercury inventory (Zhang et al., 2016).</p>
      <p>For both periods, 1995–2004 and 2007–2015, seasonally resolved trends were
different in different seasons. We believe that the observed trends of GEM
concentrations at Cape Point result from the trend of worldwide mercury
emissions and are additionally modulated by regional influences. During
1995–2004 the highest downward trend was observed in austral spring (SON)
and winter (JJA). For the 2007–2015 period the highest upward trend was
found in austral spring. Hg emissions from biomass burning in South America
and southern Africa both peak in August and September (Duncan et al., 2003;
van der Werf et al., 2006). Although the trend of these emissions is
uncertain because of differences between different emission inventories
(Granier et al., 2011), it can produce different trends in different seasons.
Biennial variation of the GEM concentrations at Cape Point, reported here,
suggest that climatological changes of transport patterns can also play a
role in seasonally different trends. The detection of the ENSO signature in
GEM concentrations at Cape Point (Slemr et al., 2016) is consistent with the
influence of both emissions from biomass burning and changing regional
transport patterns.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <title>Data availability</title>
      <p>The data sets are available from the GMOS data portal
(<uri>http://sdi.iia.cnr.it/geoint/publicpage/GMOS/gmos_historical.zul</uri>).</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p>The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>The GEM measurements made at Cape Point have been supported by the South
African Weather Service and have also received financial support from the
GMOS, a European Community-funded FP7
project (ENV.2010.4.1.3-2). We are grateful to Danie van der Spuy for the
general maintenance of the Tekran analyzer at Cape Point.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Edited by: N. Pirrone<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: two anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Brunke, E.-G., Labuschagne, C., Parker, B., Scheel, H. E., and Whittlestone, S.:
Baseline air mass selection at Cape Point, South Africa: Application of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn>222</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>Rn and other filter criteria to CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, Atmos. Environ., 38,
5693–5702, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Brunke, E.-G., Labuschagne, C., Ebinghaus, R., Kock, H. H., and Slemr, F.:
Gaseous elemental mercury depletion events observed at Cape Point during 2007–2008,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1121–1131, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1121-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-1121-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Brunke, E.-G., Ebinghaus, R., Kock, H. H., Labuschagne, C., and Slemr, F.:
Emissions of mercury in southern Africa derived from long-term observations
at Cape Point, South Africa, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 7465–7474,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7465-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-7465-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Duncan, B. N., Martin, R. V., Staudt, A. C., Yevich, R., and Logan, J. A.:
Interannual and seasonal variability of biomass burning emissions constrained
by satellite observations, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4100,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002378" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002378</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Ebinghaus, R., Jennings, S. G., Schroeder, W. H., Berg, T., Donaghy, T.,
Guentzel, J., Kenny, C., Kock, H. H., Kvietkus, K., Landing, W., Mühleck,
T., Munthe, J., Prestbo, E. M., Schneeberger, D., Slemr, F., Sommar, J.,
Urba, A., Wallschläger, D., and Xiao, Z.: International field
intercomparison measurements of atmospheric mercury species, Atmos. Environ.,
33, 3063–3073, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Ebinghaus, R., Jennings, S. G., Kock, H. H., Derwent, R. G., Manning, A. J.,
and Spain, T. G.: Decreasing trend in total gaseous mercury observations in
baseline air at Mace Head, Ireland, from 1996 to 2009, Atmos. Environ., 45,
3475–3480, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Gay, D. A., Schmeltz, D., Prestbo, E., Olson, M., Sharac, T., and Tordon, R.:
The Atmospheric Mercury Network: measurement and initial examination of an
ongoing atmospheric mercury record across North America, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
13, 11339–11349, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-11339-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-11339-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Granier, C., Bessagnet, B., Bond, T., D'Angiola, A., Denier van der Gon, H.,
Frost, G. J., Heil, A., Kaiser, J. W., Kinne, S., Klimont, Z., Kloster, S.,
Lamarque, J.-F., Liousse, C., Masui, T., Meleux, F., Mieville, A., Ohara, T.,
Raut, J.-C., Riahi, K., Schultz, M. G., Smith, S. J., Thompson, A., van
Aardenne, J., van der Werff, G. R., and van Vuuren, D. P.: Evolution of
anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions o fair pollutants at global and
regional scales during the 1980–2010 period, Clim. Change, 109, 163–190,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Lindberg, S., Bullock, R., Ebinghaus, R., Engstrom, D., Feng, X., Fitzgerald,
W., Pirrone, N., Prestbon, E., and Seigneur, C.: A synthesis of progress and
uncertainties in attributing the sources of mercury in deposition, Ambio, 36,
19–32, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Meehl, G. A.: The South Asian monsoon and the tropospheric biennial
oscillation, J. Climate, 10, 1921–1943, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Meehl, G. A. and Arblaster, J. M.: The tropospheric biennial oscillation and
Indian monsoon rainfall, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 1731–1734, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Meehl, G. A. and Arblaster, J. M.: The tropospheric biennial oscillation and
Asian-Australian monsoon rainfall, J. Climate, 15, 722–744, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Mergler, D., Anderson, H. A., Chan, L. H. N., Mahaffey, K. R., Murray, M.,
Sakamoto, M., and Stern, A. H.: Methylmercury exposure and health effects in
humans: A worldwide concern, Ambio, 36, 3–11, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Muntean, M., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Song, S., Selin, N. E., Olivier, J. G.
J., Guizzardi, D., Maas, R., and Dentener, F.: Trend analysis from 1970 to
2008 and model evaluation of EDGARv4 global gridded anthropogenic mercury
emissions, Sci. Total Environ., 494–495, 337–350, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Pacyna, J. M., Travnikov, O., De Simone, F., Hedgecock, I. M., Sundseth, K.,
Pacyna, E. G., Steenhuisen, F., Pirrone, N., Munthe, J., and Kindbom, K.:
Current and future levels of mercury atmospheric pollution on a global scale,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 12495–12511, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-12495-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-12495-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Prestbo, E. M. and Gay, D. A.: Wet deposition of mercury in the U.S. and
Canada, 1996–2005: Results and analysis of the NADP mercury deposition
network (MDN), Atmos. Environ., 43, 4223–4233, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Rotty, R. M.: Estimates of seasonal variation in fossil fuel CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emission, Tellus B, 39, 184–202, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Salmi, T., Määttä, A., Anttila, P., Ruoho-Airola, T., and Amnell,
T.: Detecting trends of annual values of atmospheric pollutants by the
Mann-Kendall test and Sen's slope estimates – the Excel template application
Makesens, Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Scheuhammer, A. M., Meyer, M. W., Sandheinrich, M. B., and Murray, M. W.:
Effects of environmental methylmercury on the health of wild birds, mammals,
and fish, Ambio, 36, 12–18, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Selin, N. E.: Global biogeochemical cycling of mercury: A review, Ann. Rev.
Environ. Resour., 34, 43–63, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.environ.051308.084314" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1146/annurev.environ.051308.084314</ext-link>,
2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Selin, N. E., Jacob, D. J., Yantoska, R. M., Strode, S., Jaeglé, L., and
Sunderland, E. M.: Global 3-D land-ocean-atmosphere model for mercury:
Present-day versus preindustrial cycles and anthropogenic enrichment factors
for deposition, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 22, GB2011, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2007GB003040" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007GB003040</ext-link>,
2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Slemr, F., Brunke, E.-G., Labuschagne, C., and Ebinghaus, R.: Total gaseous
mercury concentrations at the Cape Point GAW station and their seasonality,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L11807, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008GL033741" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008GL033741</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Slemr, F., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., Rauthe-Schöch, A., Weigelt, A.,
Ebinghaus, R., Brunke, E.-G., Martin, L., Spain, T. G., and O'Doherty, S.: El
Niño – Southern Oscillation influence on tropospheric mercury
concentrations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 1766–1771, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Soerensen, A. L., Jacob, D. J., Streets, D. G., Witt, M. L. I., Ebinghaus,
R., Mason, R. P., Andersson, M., and Sunderland, E. M.: Multi-decadal decline
of mercury in the North-Atlantic atmosphere explained by changing subsurface
seawater concentrations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L21810,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053736" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012GL053736</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>Sprovieri, F., Pirrone, N., Ebinghaus, R., Kock, H., and Dommergue, A.: A
review of worldwide atmospheric mercury measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10,
8245–8265, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-8245-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-8245-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Sprovieri, F., Pirrone, N., Bencardino, M., D'Amore, F., Carbone, F.,
Cinnirella, S., Mannarino, V., Landis, M., Ebinghaus, R., Weigelt, A.,
Brunke, E.-G., Labuschagne, C., Martin, L., Munthe, J., Wängberg, I., Artaxo,
P., Morais, F., Barbosa, H. D. M. J., Brito, J., Cairns, W., Barbante, C.,
Diéguez, M. D. C., Garcia, P. E., Dommergue, A., Angot, H., Magand, O., Skov,
H., Horvat, M., Kotnik, J., Read, K. A., Neves, L. M., Gawlik, B. M., Sena,
F., Mashyanov, N., Obolkin, V., Wip, D., Feng, X. B., Zhang, H., Fu, X.,
Ramachandran, R., Cossa, D., Knoery, J., Marusczak, N., Nerentorp, M., and
Norstrom, C.: Atmospheric mercury concentrations observed at ground-based
monitoring sites globally distributed in the framework of the GMOS network,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 11915–11935, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-11915-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-11915-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Streets, D. G., Devane, M. K., Lu, Z., Bond, T. C., Sunderland, E. M., and
Jacob, D. J.: All-time releases of mercury to the atmosphere from human
activities, Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 10485–10491, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Temme, C., Planchard, P., Steffen, A., Banic, C., Beauchamp, S., Poissant,
L., Tordon, R., and Wiens, B.: Trend, seasonal and multivariate analysis
study of total gaseous mercury data from the Canadian Atmospheric Mercury
Measurement Network (CAM-Net), Atmos. Environ., 41, 5423–5441, 2007.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Toihir, A. M., Venkataraman, S., Mbatha, N., Sangeetha, S. K., Bencherif, H.,
Brunke, E.-G., and Labuschagne, C.: Studies on CO variation and trends over
South Africa AUTHORS: and the Indian ocean using TES satellite data, S. Afr.
J. Sci., Volume 111, Number 9/10 Sep/Oct 2015, <uri>http://www.sajs.co.za</uri>,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>van der Werf, G. R., Randerson, J. T., Giglio, L., Collatz, G. J.,
Kasibhatla, P. S., and Arellano Jr., A. F.: Interannual variability in global
biomass burning emissions from 1997 to 2004, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6,
3423–3441, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3423-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-3423-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Weigelt, A., Ebinghaus, R., Manning, A. J., Derwent, R. G., Simmonds, P. G.,
Spain, T. G., Jennings, S. G., and Slemr, F.: Analysis and interpretation of
18 years of mercury observations since 1996 at Mace Head at the Atlantic
Ocean coast of Ireland, Atmos. Environ., 100, 85–93, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Weiss-Penzias, P. S., Gay, D. A., Brigham, M. E., Parsons, M. T., Gustin, M.
S., and ter Schure, A.: Trends in mercury wet deposition and mercury air
concentrations across the U.S. and Canada, Sci. Total Environ., 568,
546–556, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Wilson, S., Munthe, J., Sundseth, K., Kindbom, K., Maxson, P., Pacyna, J.,
ans Steenhuisen, F.: Updating historical global inventories of anthropogenic
mercury emissions to air, AMAP Technical Report No. 3, 14 pp., Arct. Monit.
And Assess. Programme, Oslo, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Jacob, D. J., Horowitz, H. M., Chen, L., Amos, H. M., Krabbenhoft,
D. P., Slemr, F., Louis, V. L. St., and Sunderland, E. M.: Observed decrease
in atmospheric mercury explained by global decline in anthropogenic
emissions, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 526–531, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, B. and Liang, J.-Y.: Advance in studies of tropospheric biennial
oscillation, J. Tropical Meteorol., 11, 1–9, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list><app-group content-type="float"><app><title/>

    </app></app-group></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Trend of atmospheric mercury concentrations at Cape Point  for 1995–2004 and since 2007</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p class="p">Long-term measurements of gaseous elemental mercury (GEM) concentrations at
Cape Point, South Africa, reveal a downward trend between September 1995 and
December 2005 and an upward one from March 2007 until June 2015, implying a
change in trend sign between 2004 and 2007. The trend change is
qualitatively consistent with the trend changes in GEM concentrations
observed at Mace Head, Ireland, and in mercury wet deposition over North
America, suggesting a change in worldwide mercury emissions.</p><p class="p">Seasonally resolved trends suggest a modulation of the overall trend by
regional processes. The trends in absolute terms (downward in 1995–2004
and upward in 2007–2015) are highest in austral spring (SON),
coinciding with the peak in emissions from biomass burning in South America
and southern Africa. The influence of trends in biomass burning is further
supported by a biennial variation in GEM concentration found here and an
El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) signature in GEM concentrations reported recently.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Brunke, E.-G., Labuschagne, C., Parker, B., Scheel, H. E., and Whittlestone, S.:
Baseline air mass selection at Cape Point, South Africa: Application of
<sup>222</sup>Rn and other filter criteria to CO<sub>2</sub>, Atmos. Environ., 38,
5693–5702, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Brunke, E.-G., Labuschagne, C., Ebinghaus, R., Kock, H. H., and Slemr, F.:
Gaseous elemental mercury depletion events observed at Cape Point during 2007–2008,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1121–1131, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1121-2010" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-10-1121-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Brunke, E.-G., Ebinghaus, R., Kock, H. H., Labuschagne, C., and Slemr, F.:
Emissions of mercury in southern Africa derived from long-term observations
at Cape Point, South Africa, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 7465–7474,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7465-2012" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-12-7465-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Duncan, B. N., Martin, R. V., Staudt, A. C., Yevich, R., and Logan, J. A.:
Interannual and seasonal variability of biomass burning emissions constrained
by satellite observations, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4100,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002378" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2002JD002378</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Ebinghaus, R., Jennings, S. G., Schroeder, W. H., Berg, T., Donaghy, T.,
Guentzel, J., Kenny, C., Kock, H. H., Kvietkus, K., Landing, W., Mühleck,
T., Munthe, J., Prestbo, E. M., Schneeberger, D., Slemr, F., Sommar, J.,
Urba, A., Wallschläger, D., and Xiao, Z.: International field
intercomparison measurements of atmospheric mercury species, Atmos. Environ.,
33, 3063–3073, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Ebinghaus, R., Jennings, S. G., Kock, H. H., Derwent, R. G., Manning, A. J.,
and Spain, T. G.: Decreasing trend in total gaseous mercury observations in
baseline air at Mace Head, Ireland, from 1996 to 2009, Atmos. Environ., 45,
3475–3480, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Gay, D. A., Schmeltz, D., Prestbo, E., Olson, M., Sharac, T., and Tordon, R.:
The Atmospheric Mercury Network: measurement and initial examination of an
ongoing atmospheric mercury record across North America, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
13, 11339–11349, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-11339-2013" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-13-11339-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Granier, C., Bessagnet, B., Bond, T., D'Angiola, A., Denier van der Gon, H.,
Frost, G. J., Heil, A., Kaiser, J. W., Kinne, S., Klimont, Z., Kloster, S.,
Lamarque, J.-F., Liousse, C., Masui, T., Meleux, F., Mieville, A., Ohara, T.,
Raut, J.-C., Riahi, K., Schultz, M. G., Smith, S. J., Thompson, A., van
Aardenne, J., van der Werff, G. R., and van Vuuren, D. P.: Evolution of
anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions o fair pollutants at global and
regional scales during the 1980–2010 period, Clim. Change, 109, 163–190,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Lindberg, S., Bullock, R., Ebinghaus, R., Engstrom, D., Feng, X., Fitzgerald,
W., Pirrone, N., Prestbon, E., and Seigneur, C.: A synthesis of progress and
uncertainties in attributing the sources of mercury in deposition, Ambio, 36,
19–32, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Meehl, G. A.: The South Asian monsoon and the tropospheric biennial
oscillation, J. Climate, 10, 1921–1943, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Meehl, G. A. and Arblaster, J. M.: The tropospheric biennial oscillation and
Indian monsoon rainfall, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 1731–1734, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Meehl, G. A. and Arblaster, J. M.: The tropospheric biennial oscillation and
Asian-Australian monsoon rainfall, J. Climate, 15, 722–744, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Mergler, D., Anderson, H. A., Chan, L. H. N., Mahaffey, K. R., Murray, M.,
Sakamoto, M., and Stern, A. H.: Methylmercury exposure and health effects in
humans: A worldwide concern, Ambio, 36, 3–11, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Muntean, M., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Song, S., Selin, N. E., Olivier, J. G.
J., Guizzardi, D., Maas, R., and Dentener, F.: Trend analysis from 1970 to
2008 and model evaluation of EDGARv4 global gridded anthropogenic mercury
emissions, Sci. Total Environ., 494–495, 337–350, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Pacyna, J. M., Travnikov, O., De Simone, F., Hedgecock, I. M., Sundseth, K.,
Pacyna, E. G., Steenhuisen, F., Pirrone, N., Munthe, J., and Kindbom, K.:
Current and future levels of mercury atmospheric pollution on a global scale,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 12495–12511, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-12495-2016" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-16-12495-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Prestbo, E. M. and Gay, D. A.: Wet deposition of mercury in the U.S. and
Canada, 1996–2005: Results and analysis of the NADP mercury deposition
network (MDN), Atmos. Environ., 43, 4223–4233, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Rotty, R. M.: Estimates of seasonal variation in fossil fuel CO<sub>2</sub>
emission, Tellus B, 39, 184–202, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Salmi, T., Määttä, A., Anttila, P., Ruoho-Airola, T., and Amnell,
T.: Detecting trends of annual values of atmospheric pollutants by the
Mann-Kendall test and Sen's slope estimates – the Excel template application
Makesens, Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Scheuhammer, A. M., Meyer, M. W., Sandheinrich, M. B., and Murray, M. W.:
Effects of environmental methylmercury on the health of wild birds, mammals,
and fish, Ambio, 36, 12–18, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Selin, N. E.: Global biogeochemical cycling of mercury: A review, Ann. Rev.
Environ. Resour., 34, 43–63, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.environ.051308.084314" target="_blank">doi:10.1146/annurev.environ.051308.084314</a>,
2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Selin, N. E., Jacob, D. J., Yantoska, R. M., Strode, S., Jaeglé, L., and
Sunderland, E. M.: Global 3-D land-ocean-atmosphere model for mercury:
Present-day versus preindustrial cycles and anthropogenic enrichment factors
for deposition, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 22, GB2011, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2007GB003040" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2007GB003040</a>,
2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Slemr, F., Brunke, E.-G., Labuschagne, C., and Ebinghaus, R.: Total gaseous
mercury concentrations at the Cape Point GAW station and their seasonality,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L11807, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008GL033741" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2008GL033741</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Slemr, F., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., Rauthe-Schöch, A., Weigelt, A.,
Ebinghaus, R., Brunke, E.-G., Martin, L., Spain, T. G., and O'Doherty, S.: El
Niño – Southern Oscillation influence on tropospheric mercury
concentrations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 1766–1771, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Soerensen, A. L., Jacob, D. J., Streets, D. G., Witt, M. L. I., Ebinghaus,
R., Mason, R. P., Andersson, M., and Sunderland, E. M.: Multi-decadal decline
of mercury in the North-Atlantic atmosphere explained by changing subsurface
seawater concentrations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L21810,
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053736" target="_blank">doi:10.1029/2012GL053736</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Sprovieri, F., Pirrone, N., Ebinghaus, R., Kock, H., and Dommergue, A.: A
review of worldwide atmospheric mercury measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10,
8245–8265, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-8245-2010" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-10-8245-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Sprovieri, F., Pirrone, N., Bencardino, M., D'Amore, F., Carbone, F.,
Cinnirella, S., Mannarino, V., Landis, M., Ebinghaus, R., Weigelt, A.,
Brunke, E.-G., Labuschagne, C., Martin, L., Munthe, J., Wängberg, I., Artaxo,
P., Morais, F., Barbosa, H. D. M. J., Brito, J., Cairns, W., Barbante, C.,
Diéguez, M. D. C., Garcia, P. E., Dommergue, A., Angot, H., Magand, O., Skov,
H., Horvat, M., Kotnik, J., Read, K. A., Neves, L. M., Gawlik, B. M., Sena,
F., Mashyanov, N., Obolkin, V., Wip, D., Feng, X. B., Zhang, H., Fu, X.,
Ramachandran, R., Cossa, D., Knoery, J., Marusczak, N., Nerentorp, M., and
Norstrom, C.: Atmospheric mercury concentrations observed at ground-based
monitoring sites globally distributed in the framework of the GMOS network,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 11915–11935, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-11915-2016" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-16-11915-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Streets, D. G., Devane, M. K., Lu, Z., Bond, T. C., Sunderland, E. M., and
Jacob, D. J.: All-time releases of mercury to the atmosphere from human
activities, Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 10485–10491, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Temme, C., Planchard, P., Steffen, A., Banic, C., Beauchamp, S., Poissant,
L., Tordon, R., and Wiens, B.: Trend, seasonal and multivariate analysis
study of total gaseous mercury data from the Canadian Atmospheric Mercury
Measurement Network (CAM-Net), Atmos. Environ., 41, 5423–5441, 2007.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Toihir, A. M., Venkataraman, S., Mbatha, N., Sangeetha, S. K., Bencherif, H.,
Brunke, E.-G., and Labuschagne, C.: Studies on CO variation and trends over
South Africa AUTHORS: and the Indian ocean using TES satellite data, S. Afr.
J. Sci., Volume 111, Number 9/10 Sep/Oct 2015, <a href="http://www.sajs.co.za" target="_blank">http://www.sajs.co.za</a>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
van der Werf, G. R., Randerson, J. T., Giglio, L., Collatz, G. J.,
Kasibhatla, P. S., and Arellano Jr., A. F.: Interannual variability in global
biomass burning emissions from 1997 to 2004, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6,
3423–3441, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3423-2006" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-6-3423-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Weigelt, A., Ebinghaus, R., Manning, A. J., Derwent, R. G., Simmonds, P. G.,
Spain, T. G., Jennings, S. G., and Slemr, F.: Analysis and interpretation of
18 years of mercury observations since 1996 at Mace Head at the Atlantic
Ocean coast of Ireland, Atmos. Environ., 100, 85–93, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Weiss-Penzias, P. S., Gay, D. A., Brigham, M. E., Parsons, M. T., Gustin, M.
S., and ter Schure, A.: Trends in mercury wet deposition and mercury air
concentrations across the U.S. and Canada, Sci. Total Environ., 568,
546–556, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Wilson, S., Munthe, J., Sundseth, K., Kindbom, K., Maxson, P., Pacyna, J.,
ans Steenhuisen, F.: Updating historical global inventories of anthropogenic
mercury emissions to air, AMAP Technical Report No. 3, 14 pp., Arct. Monit.
And Assess. Programme, Oslo, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Jacob, D. J., Horowitz, H. M., Chen, L., Amos, H. M., Krabbenhoft,
D. P., Slemr, F., Louis, V. L. St., and Sunderland, E. M.: Observed decrease
in atmospheric mercury explained by global decline in anthropogenic
emissions, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 526–531, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, B. and Liang, J.-Y.: Advance in studies of tropospheric biennial
oscillation, J. Tropical Meteorol., 11, 1–9, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
