ArticleEnvironmental geochemistry and health2018
Toxic effects of coal fly ash on wheat seedlings.
Article in Environmental geochemistry and health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Photosynthetic Behavior of Wheat in Reclaimed Fly Ash Amended Soil-Probed by MINI-PAM (Photosynthetic Yield Analyzer).Plant-environment interactions (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Rhizosphere properties and heavy metal accumulation of plants growing in the fly ash dumpsite, Morupule power plant, Botswana.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
- Application of different single extraction procedures for assessing the bioavailability of heavy metal(loid)s in soils from overlapped areas of farmland and coal resources.Environmental science and pollution research international · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We studied heavy metal (HM) stress on wheat seedlings (AK-58) with and without coal fly ash (CFA) exposure. Three CFA spray rates were used to simulate air quality of the second level. Results show airborne particulates can directly enter plant leaves, affecting the whole plant. HM deposition decreases seedling size and mass and reduces activities of the chlorophyll family, photosynthesis enzymes (RuBP and PEPC), and photosynthesis efficiency. In leaves, HM deposition increases with the CFA spray rate. In roots, however, CFA exposure seems to reduce HM deposition, compared with the control without CFA exposure. A possible reason is that HM deposition in leaves from airborne particulates hinders photosynthesis, weakens the whole physiology of the seedlings, and consequently reduces root absorption of HMs from soil. CFA leads to chloroplast expansion, layer-stack disorder of grana, plastoglobule increase, and even chlorophyll membrane damage.
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.