ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2016
Screening Nonionic Surfactants for Enhanced Biodegradation of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Remaining in Soil After Conventional Biological Treatment.
Article in Environmental science & technology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioaugmentation as microbiome engineering: a framework for evaluating functional performance, persistence, and safety.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Enhancing Phenanthrene Degradation byMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Surfactant-Based Chemical Washing to Remediate Oil-Contaminated Soil: The State of Knowledge.Toxics · 2024Review
- Recent Advances in the Study of the Remediation of Polycyclic Aromatic Compound (PAC)-Contaminated Soils: Transformation Products, Toxicity, and Bioavailability Analyses.Environmental science & technology letters · 2020Article
- Multifunctional metal-organic frameworks in oil spills and associated organic pollutant remediation.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Review
- Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Trimer Disassembly and Inactivation via Peptide-Small Molecule Synergy.ACS chemical biology · 2020Article
- Production of a biosurfactant from Bacillus methylotrophicus UCP1616 for use in the bioremediation of oil-contaminated environments.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2018Article
- Implications of Bioremediation of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon-Contaminated Soils for Human Health and Cancer Risk.Environmental science & technology · 2017Review
- Nontarget Analysis Reveals a Bacterial Metabolite of Pyrene Implicated in the Genotoxicity of Contaminated Soil after Bioremediation.Environmental science & technology · 2017Article
- Biotoxicity and bioavailability of hydrophobic organic compounds solubilized in nonionic surfactant micelle phase and cloud point system.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2017Article
- Surfactant-induced bacterial community changes correlated with increased polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon degradation in contaminated soil.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2016Article
- Improving Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Biodegradation in Contaminated Soil Through Low-Level Surfactant Addition After Conventional Bioremediation.Environmental engineering science · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A total of five nonionic surfactants (Brij 30, Span 20, Ecosurf EH-3, polyoxyethylene sorbitol hexaoleate, and R-95 rhamnolipid) were evaluated for their ability to enhance PAH desorption and biodegradation in contaminated soil after treatment in an aerobic bioreactor. Surfactant doses corresponded to aqueous-phase concentrations below the critical micelle concentration in the soil-slurry system. The effect of surfactant amendment on soil (geno)toxicity was also evaluated for Brij 30, Span 20, and POESH using the DT40 B-lymphocyte cell line and two of its DNA-repair-deficient mutants. Compared to the results from no-surfactant controls, incubation of the bioreactor-treated soil with all surfactants increased PAH desorption, and all except R-95 substantially increased PAH biodegradation. POESH had the greatest effect, removing 50% of total measured PAHs. Brij 30, Span 20, and POESH were particularly effective at enhancing biodegradation of four- and five-ring PAHs, including five of the seven carcinogenic PAHs, with removals up to 80%. Surfactant amendment also significantly enhanced the removal of alkyl-PAHs. Most treatments significantly increased soil toxicity. Only the no-surfactant control and Brij 30 at the optimum dose significantly decreased soil genotoxicity, as evaluated with either mutant cell line. Overall, these findings have implications for the feasibility of bioremediation to achieve cleanup levels for PAHs in soil.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.