ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2015
Identification and apportionment of hazardous elements in the sediments in the Yangtze River estuary.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Heavy Metals in the Mainstream Water of the Yangtze River Downstream: Distribution, Sources and Health Risk Assessment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Trace element contamination in the mine-affected stream sediments of Oued Rarai in north-western Tunisia: a river basin scale assessment.Environmental geochemistry and health · 2021Article
- Metals pollution from textile production wastewater in Chinese southeastern coastal area: occurrence, source identification, and associated risk assessment.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
- In-time source tracking of watershed loads of Taihu Lake Basin, China based on spatial relationship modeling.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018Article
- Integrated Application of Multivariate Statistical Methods to Source Apportionment of Watercourses in the Liao River Basin, Northeast China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, positive matrix factorization (PMF) and principal components analysis (PCA) were combined to identify and apportion pollution-based sources of hazardous elements in the surface sediments in the Yangtze River estuary (YRE). Source identification analysis indicated that PC1, including Al, Fe, Mn, Cr, Ni, As, Cu, and Zn, can be defined as a sewage component; PC2, including Pb and Sb, can be considered as an atmospheric deposition component; and PC3, containing Cd and Hg, can be considered as an agricultural nonpoint component. To better identify the sources and quantitatively apportion the concentrations to their sources, eight sources were identified with PMF: agricultural/industrial sewage mixed (18.6 %), mining wastewater (15.9 %), agricultural fertilizer (14.5 %), atmospheric deposition (12.8 %), agricultural nonpoint (10.6 %), industrial wastewater (9.8 %), marine activity (9.0 %), and nickel plating industry (8.8 %). Overall, the hazardous element content seems to be more connected to anthropogenic activity instead of natural sources. The PCA results laid the foundation for the PMF analysis by providing a general classification of sources. PMF resolves more factors with a higher explained variance than PCA; PMF provided both the internal analysis and the quantitative analysis. The combination of the two methods can provide more reasonable and reliable results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26511260What 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.