ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2016
Potential of barrage fish ponds for the mitigation of pesticide pollution in streams.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Barrage fishponds, a funnel effect for metal contaminants on headwater streams.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Article
- Article
- Catchment land use-dependent effects of barrage fishponds on the functioning of headwater streams.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2017Article
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
Barrage fishponds may represent a significant surface water area in some French regions. Knowledge on their effect on water resources is therefore necessary for the development of appropriate water quality management plans at the regional scale. Although there is much information on the nutrient removal capacity of these water bodies, little attention has been paid to other agricultural contaminants such as pesticides. The present paper reports the results of a 1-year field monitoring of pesticide concentrations and water flows measured upstream and downstream from a fishpond in North East France to evaluate its capacity in reducing pesticide loads. Among the 42 active substances that had been applied on the fishpond's catchment, seven pesticides (five herbicides, two fungicides) were studied. The highest concentration in the inflow to the pond was 26.5 μg/L (MCPA), while the highest concentration in pond outflow was 0.54 μg/L (prosulfocarb). Removal rates of dissolved pesticides in the fishpond ranged from 0-8% (prosulfocarb) to 100% (clopyralid). Although not primarily designed for the treatment of diffuse sources of pesticides, the studied fishpond had the potential to do so.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26381791What 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.