Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24705895›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2014

Study of different Chemcatcher configurations in the monitoring of nonylphenol ethoxylates and nonylphenol in aquatic environment.

Heidi Ahkola, Sirpa Herve, Juha Knuutinen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Suitability of passive sampling for the monitoring of pharmaceuticals in Finnish surface waters.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Heidi AhkolaFinnish Environment Institute (SYKE), P.O. Box 35, 40014, Jyväskylä, Finland, heidi.ahkola@ymparisto.fi.
Sirpa Herve
Juha Knuutinen
Finnish Environment Institute · FIUniversity of Jyväskylä · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The main aim of the European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD) (2000/60/EC) is to protect rivers, lakes, coastal waters and groundwaters (EC 2000). The implementation of the WFD requires monitoring the concentration levels of several priority pollutants such as nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEOs) and nonylphenol (NP) in the area of EU. The present practices for determining the concentration levels of various pollutants are, in many respects, insufficient, and there is an urgent need to develop more cost-effective sampling methods. A passive sampling tool named Chemcatcher was tested for monitoring NPEOs and NP in aqueous media. These environmentally harmful substances have been widely used in different household and industrial applications, and they affect aquatic ecosystems, for example, by acting as endocrine disrupting compounds. The suitability of different receiving phases which were sulfonated styrene-divinylbenzene reversed phase polymer (SDB-RPS), standard styrene-divinyl benzene polymer (SDB-XC) and C-18 (octadecyl) was assessed in laboratory and field trials. The effect of a diffusion membrane on the accumulation of studied compounds was also investigated. The SDB-XC and C-18 receiving phases collected the NPEOs and NP most effectively. The water flow affected the accumulation factor of the studied substances in the field trials, and the water concentrations calculated using sampling rates were tenfold lower than those measured with conventional spot sampling. The concentration of the analytes in spot samples taken from the sampling sites might be higher because in that case, the particle-bound fraction is also measured. The NPEOs readily attach to suspended matter, and therefore, the total concentration of such compounds in water is much higher. Also, the spot samples were not taken daily but once a week, while the passive samplers collected the compounds continuously for 2- or 4-week time periods. This may cause differences when comparing the results of those two methods as well. Both techniques can be applied for monitoring the concentration levels at different sampling sites, but the calculated and measured analyte concentrations in surrounding water are not necessarily comparable with each other. More experiments are still needed to study the effect of hydrological issues and humic substances on the accumulation of chemicals. However, the Chemcatcher passive sampler gives valuable information about the mean concentration levels of studied compounds during 2- or 4-week sampling period. This is important for comparison of annual monitoring results, especially in sampling sites with rapidly fluctuating concentrations.

Indexed as

Environmental MonitoringEcosystemEndocrine DisruptorsEthylene GlycolsLakesMolecular StructurePhenolsRiversSeawaterWater Pollutants, ChemicalEndocrine DisruptorsEthylene GlycolsnonylphenolPhenolstericsWater Pollutants, Chemical

Identifiers

PMID24705895
OpenAlexW2061170200

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.