ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2017
Suspended particulate matter collection methods influence the quantification of polycyclic aromatic compounds in the river system.
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.
- A Review on Adaption of Microbiomes to Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons: An Alternate Approach to Environment Sustainability.Recent patents on biotechnology · 2026Review
- Suspended Materials in River Waters Differentially Enrich Class 1 Integron- and IncP-1 Plasmid-Carrying Bacteria in Sediments.Frontiers in microbiology · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, we compared the influence of two different collection methods, filtration (FT) and continuous flow field centrifugation (CFC), on the concentration and the distribution of polycyclic aromatic compounds (PACs) in suspended particulate matter (SPM) occurring in river waters. SPM samples were collected simultaneously with FT and CFC from a river during six sampling campaigns over 2 years, covering different hydrological contexts. SPM samples were analyzed to determine the concentration of PACs including 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), 11 oxygenated PACs (O-PACs), and 5 nitrogen PACs (N-PACs). Results showed significant differences between the two separation methods. In half of the sampling campaigns, PAC concentrations differed from a factor 2 to 30 comparing FT and CFC-collected SPMs. The PAC distributions were also affected by the separation method. FT-collected SPM were enriched in 2-3 ring PACs whereas CFC-collected SPM had PAC distributions dominated by medium to high molecular weight compounds typical of combustion processes. This could be explained by distinct cut-off threshold of the two separation methods and strongly suggested the retention of colloidal and/or fine matter on glass-fiber filters particularly enriched in low molecular PACs. These differences between FT and CFC were not systematic but rather enhanced by high water flow rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28815369What 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.