ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2015
Is the toxicity of pesticide mixtures on river biofilm accounted for solely by the major compounds identified?
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Pesticide Mixtures and Environmental Factors on Benthic Diatom Communities: A Microcosm Approach.Environmental science & technology · 2026Article
- Improving Toxicity Assessment of Pesticide Mixtures: The Use of Polar Passive Sampling Devices Extracts in Microalgae Toxicity Tests.Frontiers in microbiology · 2016Review
- Potential toxicity of pesticides in freshwater environments: passive sampling, exposure and impacts on biofilms: the PoToMAC project.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comparative effects of long-term exposure to Polar Organic Chemical Integrative Sampler (POCIS) extracts (PE) and to a reconstituted mixture based on the major compounds quantified in the PE were evaluated on river biofilm communities. The study aimed to characterize the effects of long-term and low-dose exposure to pesticides on natural biofilm communities and to evaluate if the effects due to PE exposure could be explained solely by the major compounds identified in the extracts. Biofilms from an uncontaminated site were exposed in artificial channels to realistic environmental concentrations using diluted PE, with the 12 major compounds quantified in the extracts (Mix) or with water not containing pesticides (Ctr). Significant differences between biofilms exposed to pesticides or not were observed with regard to diatom density, biomass (dry weight and ash-free dry mass), photosynthetic efficiency (ΦpsII) and antioxidant enzyme activities. After 14 days of exposure to the different treatments, the observed trend towards a decrease of mean diatom cell biovolumes in samples exposed to pesticides was related to the control biofilms' higher relative abundance of large species like Cocconeis placentula or Amphora copulata and lower relative abundance of small species like Eolimna minima compared to the contaminated ones. Principal component analyses clearly separated contaminated (PE and Mix) from non-contaminated (Ctr) biofilms; on the contrary, the analyses did not reveal separation between biofilms exposed to PE or to the 12 major compounds identified in the extract.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25077658What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.