ArticleEnvironmental geochemistry and health2018
A comparison study of the potential risks induced in arable land and forest soils by carcass-derived pollutants.
Article in Environmental geochemistry and health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Improper decisions concerning animal carcass disposal sites pose grave threats to environmental biosecurity. However, only a few studies have focused on the effects of different land-use types on the composition of carcass-derived pollutants and microbial responses to the disturbances. This study was conducted using soil microcosms with minced pork built from arable land and forest soils for 5 weeks. To compare the risk induced from different land-use types by carcass burial, the soil properties, the microbial community, and multiple-antibiotic-resistant bacteria were evaluated for microcosm containing 0, 1.5 and 7.5 g of minced pork. The abiotic properties, including pH, organic carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus compounds, significantly increased, regardless of the land-use types and applied load masses. The microbial diversity indices of the forest soil were reduced, whereas those of the arable land remained relatively stable. The disturbances produced from carcass-derived pollutants altered the bacterial community structures differently for the different land-use types. The treatment increased multiple-antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the both soil samples, although the increase in the forest soil was significantly less compared to the arable land soils.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28299471What 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.