Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28357788›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2017

Distribution, sources, and potential risk of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soils from an industrial district in Shanxi, China.

Haihua Jiao, Gaopeng Bian, Xi Chen, Suiliang Wang, Xuliang Zhuang, Zhihui Bai

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Haihua JiaoDepartment of Biological Sciences and Technology, Changzhi University, Changzhi, 046011, China.
Gaopeng BianDepartment of Biological Sciences and Technology, Changzhi University, Changzhi, 046011, China.
Xi ChenResearch Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100085, China.
Suiliang WangDepartment of Biological Sciences and Technology, Changzhi University, Changzhi, 046011, China.
Xuliang ZhuangResearch Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100085, China.
Zhihui BaiResearch Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100085, China. zhbai@rcees.ac.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3818-527X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Concentration, composition profile, orientation distribution, sources, and potential risks of 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were analyzed in 76 surface (0-25 cm) soil samples collected from the Changzhi industrial district in July 2014 using a gas chromatography mass spectrometer (GC-MS QP2010 Ultra) system. The composition patterns of the PAHs were dominated by the presence of four-ring PAHs (average 42.9%), followed by three-ring (average 25.9%), five-ring PAHs (average 25.6%), two-ring PAHs (average 5.03%), and lastly, six-ring PAHs (average 0.641%). Source apportionment of the soil PAHs was also performed by the diagnostic ratios, principal component analysis (PCA), and coefficient of divergence (CD) analysis indicated signatures of PAHs sources (including incineration, coal/wood combustion, and vehicular exhaust emission). The total concentration of 16 PAHs (∑16PAHs) found in the roadsides soils (RS) ranged from 2197 to 25,041 μg kg

Indexed as

Polycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonsCanadaChinaEnvironmental MonitoringHumansRisk AssessmentSoilSoil PollutantsPolycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonsSoilSoil PollutantsBenzo[a]pyreneContaminationPAHsPotential riskSoil

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.