ReviewEcotoxicology (London, England)2017
Ecotoxicity of boric acid in standard laboratory tests with plants and soil organisms.
Review in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Placing arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on the risk assessment test battery of plant protection products (PPPs).Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2018Article
- Boric acid as reference substance for ecotoxicity tests in tropical artificial soil.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To verify the continuous sensitivity of ecotoxicological tests (mainly the test organisms), reference substances with known toxicity are regularly tested. Ideally, this substance(s) would lack specificity in its mode action, be bioavailable and readily attainable with cost-effective means of chemical characterization. Boric acid has satisfied these criteria, but has most recently been characterized as a substance of very high concern, due to reproductive effects in humans, thus limiting its recommendation as an ideal reference toxicant. However, there is probably no other chemical for which ecotoxicity in soil has been so intensively studied; an extensive literature review yielded lethal (including avoidance) and sublethal data for 38 taxa. The ecotoxicity data were evaluated using species sensitivity distributions, collectively across all taxa, and separately according to species type, endpoints, soil type and duration. The lack of specificity in the mode of action yielded broad toxicity among soil taxa and soil types, and provided a collective approach to assessing species sensitivity, while taking into consideration differences in test methodologies and exposure durations. Toxicity was species-specific with Folsomia candida and enchytraied species demonstrating the most sensitivity; among plants, the following trend occurred: dicotyledonous (more sensitive) ≫ monocotyledonous ≫ gymnosperm species. Sensitivity was also time and endpoint specific, with endpoints such as lethality and avoidance being less sensitive than reproduction effects. Furthermore, given the breadth of data and toxicity demonstrated by boric acid, lessons learned from its evaluation are discussed to recommend the properties required by an ideal reference substance for the soil compartment.
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.