Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29380202›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2018

A study through batch tests on the analytical determination and the fate and removal of methamphetamine in the biological treatment of domestic wastewater.

Maria Rosaria Boni, Agostina Chiavola, Camilla Di Marcantonio, Silvia Sbaffoni, Stefano Biagioli, Giancarlo Cecchini, Alessandro Frugis

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. "Waste Not, Want Not" - Leveraging Sewer Systems and Wastewater-Based Epidemiology for Drug Use Trends and Pharmaceutical Monitoring.Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maria Rosaria BoniDepartment of Civil Building and Environmental Engineering (DICEA), Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, Rome, Italy.
Agostina ChiavolaDepartment of Civil Building and Environmental Engineering (DICEA), Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, Rome, Italy.
Camilla Di MarcantonioDepartment of Civil Building and Environmental Engineering (DICEA), Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, Rome, Italy. camilla.dimarcantonio@uniroma1.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6794-8101
Silvia SbaffoniENEA-Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development, Research Centre Casaccia, Technical Unit for Environmental Technologies, Via Anguillarese 301, 00123, Rome, Italy.
Stefano BiagioliACEA ELABORI SpA, Via Vitorchiano 165, Rome, Italy.
Giancarlo CecchiniACEA ELABORI SpA, Via Vitorchiano 165, Rome, Italy.
Alessandro FrugisACEA ELABORI SpA, Via Vitorchiano 165, Rome, Italy.
Sapienza University of Rome · ITNational Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Methamphetamine (MET) is one of the most used illicit drugs in Europe and is recognized as one of the Emerging Organic Micropollutants. It is discharged into the sewerage system from different sources and then enters the wastewater treatment plants. The present study aimed at providing a better knowledge of the fate of MET through the wastewater treatment plants. The study addressed two different issues: (1) optimization of the analytical methods for MET determination in both liquid and sludge phases, focusing on the effects of potentially interfering substances and (2) investigation on the behaviour of MET in the biological treatment process, with specific concern for the biomass activity at different drug concentrations. Results of the study on issue 1 highlighted that the applied analytical method for MET determination (UPLC-MS/MS) is affected by the main components of wastewater for about 9-23%, which is comparable with the uncertainties of the method (about ± 28%). The method showed also to be repeatable and reliable (recovery > 75%; repeatability < 10-15%; bias uncertainty < 30%), and relatively easy-to-use. Therefore, it can be considered suitable for measurements on routine base in the WWTPs. Batch tests conducted to address issue 2 showed total removal of 84, 90, and 96% at 50, 100, and 200 ng/L initial MET concentration, respectively, for a contact time of 6 h. The removal process was mainly ascribed to the biological activity of both heterotrophic and autotrophic bacteria. The pseudo first-order kinetic model provided the best fitting of the experimental data of the overall biological processes at all the tested concentrations. Furthermore, the respirometric tests showed that MET does not induce any inhibition. Adsorption of MET on activated sludge was always very low.

Indexed as

AdsorptionBiomassMethamphetamineSewageWaste Disposal, FluidWastewaterWater Pollutants, ChemicalWater PurificationMethamphetamineSewageWastewaterWater Pollutants, ChemicalBiodegradationDomestic wastewaterEmerging contaminantsIllicit drugsMethamphetamineRespirometric test

Identifiers

PMID29380202
OpenAlexW2793996361

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.