ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2018
Contrasted effects of an anti-cyanobacterial ultrasound device on the non-target freshwater invertebrate species Gammarus roeseli.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determination of biological activities of nanoparticles containing silver and copper in water disinfection with/without ultrasound technique.Journal of environmental health science & engineering · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this work was to investigate the effects of an anti-cyanobacterial ultrasound device (supplied by an electrical power of 15 W and emitting at 23 and 46 kHz) on the widespread freshwater amphipod species Gammarus roeseli. First, laboratory scale experiments in 8-L glass tanks showed that an ultrasound exposure of 2 h and 40 min was sufficient to produce 50% mortality, along with a 6.5 °C water temperature increase. Avoiding excessive heating by using a water-cooling and recirculation system permitted an exposure time of 29 h for the same mortality rate. A potential relationship between temperature's rise and amphipod mortality was hence highlighted. Moreover, the use of plastic mesh bag (0.5 mm mesh size) as a physical barrier has not shown any lethal effects of ultrasound exposure. Furthermore, the induction of GPx or GST activity as oxidative stress biomarkers was not observed. This could be explained by reduced ultrasound intensity inside the mesh bags. Thus, according to these results, the tested ultrasound system is not expected to be acutely harmful in the field.
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.