ArticleJournal of environmental health science & engineering2017
The synergistic use of plant and isolated bacteria to clean up polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from contaminated soil.
Article in Journal of environmental health science & engineering, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unraveling the Role of Microbes in Remediation of High Molecular Weight Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Persistence in the Environment.Applied biochemistry and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Biodegradation of Benzo(a)pyrene in Contaminated Soil: Plant and Microorganism Contributions from Isotope Tracing.Toxics · 2025Article
- Enhanced Remediation of Phenanthrene and Naphthalene by Corn-Bacterial Consortium in Contaminated Soil.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons: Sources, Toxicity, and Remediation Approaches.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Review
- Optimum removal conditions of aniline compounds in simulated wastewater by laccase from white-rot fungi.Journal of environmental health science & engineering · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiological methods of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) contamination elimination typically involve the transformation of contaminants to non-toxic materials by microorganisms and plants and appear to be the most effective methods available.
methodsIn this study,
resultsThe results showed that the treated samples inoculated with both bacteria had a significantly higher percentage of seed germination and root and shoot biomass compared to other treatments. The concentration of some PAHs reduced significantly (Pvalue < 0.05) in the rhizosphere of the treated samples inoculated with both bacteria compared to in contaminated soils. Concentrations of some PAHs (eg. Naphthalene, Phenanthrene, Benzo[a]anthracene and Dibenzo[a,h]anthracene) even reached below the detection limit of the method. The PAHs concentrations in the treated samples inoculated with bacteria was decreased significantly (Pvalue < 0.05). Therefore, the results showed the high efficiency of the Festuca and bacterial inoculation in eliminating PAHs from the soil.
conclusionAccording to the results, the partnership of
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.