ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2017
Environmental risk assessment in five rivers of Parana River basin, Southern Brazil, through biomarkers in Astyanax spp.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genotoxicity evaluation in fish (Toxicology research · 2025Article
- Genotoxic effect of heavy metals onHeliyon · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the current study, water quality of five river sites in Parana River basin (Brazil), utilized for public water supply, was assessed through a set of biomarkers in fish Astyanax spp. Population growth and inadequate use of land are challenges to the preservation of biodiversity and resources such as water. Some physicochemical parameters as well as somatic indexes, gills and liver histopathology, genotoxicity, and biochemical biomarkers were evaluated. The highest gonadosomatic index (GSI) and antioxidant parameters (catalase and glutathione S-transferase activities, non-protein thiols), as well as the lowest damage to biomolecules (lipid peroxidation, protein carbonylation, DNA damage) were observed in site 0 (Piava River), which is located at an environmental protected area. Site 1, located in the same river, but downstream site 0 and outside the protection area, presents some level of impact. Fish from site 2 (Antas River), which lack of riparian forest and suffer from silting, presented the highest micronucleus incidence and no melanomacrophages. Differently, individuals from site 3 (Xambrê River) and site 4 (Pinhalzinho River) which receive surface runoff from Umuarama city, urban and industrial sewage, have the highest incidences of liver and gill histopathological alterations, including neoplasia, which indicated the worst health conditions of all sites. In particular, site 4 had high levels of total nitrogen and ammonia, high turbidity, and very low oxygen levels, which indicate important chemical impact. Comparison of the biomarkers in fish allowed classification of the five sites in terms of environmental impact and revealed that sites 3 and 4 had particular poor water quality.
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.