ArticleScientific reports2016
Bioavailability of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and their Potential Application in Eco-risk Assessment and Source Apportionment in Urban River Sediment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cancer Risk Assessment of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in the Soils and Sediments of India: A Meta-Analysis.Environmental management · 2017Pooled it
- Black alder's (Alnus glutinosa L.) defense against polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).Environmental science and pollution research international · 2026Article
- Applicability of Ash Wastes for Reducing Trace Element Content inMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Multibiomarker responses to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and microplastics in thumbprint emperor Lethrinus harak from a South Pacific locally managed marine area.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Application of independent immobilization in benzo[a]pyrene biodegradation by synthetic microbial consortium.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2019Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditional risk assessment and source apportionment of sediments based on bulk polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) can introduce biases due to unknown aging effects in various sediments. We used a mild solvent (hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin) to extract the bioavailable fraction of PAHs (a-PAHs) from sediment samples collected in Pearl River, southern China. We investigated the potential application of this technique for ecological risk assessments and source apportionment. We found that the distribution of PAHs was associated with human activities and that the a-PAHs accounted for a wide range (4.7%-21.2%) of total-PAHs (t-PAHs), and high risk sites were associated with lower t-PAHs but higher a-PAHs. The correlation between a-PAHs and the sediment toxicity assessed using tubificid worms (r = -0.654, P = 0.021) was greater than that from t-PAH-based risk assessment (r = -0.230, P = 0.472). Moreover, the insignificant correlation between a-PAH content and mPEC-Q of low molecular weight PAHs implied the potential bias of t-PAH-based risk assessment. The source apportionment from mild extracted fractions was consistent across different indicators and was in accordance with typical pollution sources. Our results suggested that mild extraction-based approaches reduce the potential error from aging effects because the mild extracted PAHs provide a more direct indicator of bioavailability and fresher fractions in sediments.
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.