ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2018
Modelling the effects of PSII inhibitor pulse exposure on two algae in co-culture.
Article in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Strengths and Limitations of Toxicokinetic-Toxicodynamic (TKTD) Models for Freshwater Microalgae.Environmental science & technology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A weakness of standard testing procedures is that they do not consider interactions between organisms, and they focus only on single species. Furthermore, these procedures do not take into account pulse exposure. However, pulse exposure is of particular importance because in streams, after crop application and during and after precipitation, herbicide concentrations fluctuate widely and can exceed the Annual Average Environmental Quality Standards (AA-EQS), which aim to protect the aquatic environment. The sensitivity of the algae Scenedesmus vacuolatus and Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata in a co-culture exposed to pulses is thus analysed in this study. As a first step, the growths of the algae in co-culture are investigated. For initial cell densities fixed, respectively, to 100,000 and 50,000 cells/mL, the growth of each alga is exponential over at least 48 h. S. vacuolatus seems to influence the growth of P. subcapitata negatively. Allelopathy is a possible explanation for this growth inhibition. The toxicity of the herbicide isoproturon is later tested on the algae S. vacuolatus and P. subcapitata cultured alone and in the co-culture. Despite the supplementary stress on the algae in the co-culture competing for nutrients, the toxicity of the herbicide is lower for the two algae when they are in the co-culture than when they are in separated culture. A model is adapted and used to predict the cell-density inhibition on the alga S. vacuolatus in the co-culture with the alga P. subcapitata exposed to a pulse concentration of isoproturon. Four laboratory experiments are performed to validate the model. The comparison between the laboratory and the modelled effects shows good agreement. The differences can be considered minor most of time. For future studies, it is important to ensure that the cell count is precise, as it is used to determine the parameters of the model. The differences can be also induced by the fact that the cell number of the alga P. subcapitata re-suspended in a new OECD medium after the centrifugation process cannot be fixed.
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.