ReviewEnvironmental science and pollution research international2018
Efficiency of biomonitoring methods applying tropical bioindicator plants for assessing the phytoxicity of the air pollutants in SE, Brazil.
Review 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Breathing Fresh Air in the City: Implementing Avenue Trees as a Sustainable Solution to Reduce Particulate Pollution in Urban Agglomerations.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Barking up the Right Tree: Using Tree Bark to Track Airborne Particles in School Environment and Link Science to Society.GeoHealth · 2022Article
- Foliage visible injury in the tropical tree species, Astronium graveolens is strictly related to phytotoxic ozone dose (PODy).Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
- Potential of Thirteen Urban Greening Plants to Capture Particulate Matter on Leaf Surfaces across Three Levels of Ambient Atmospheric Pollution.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the tropical region, the greatest challenge of the biomonitoring approach is to establish linear relationships between biomarkers measured in plants and pollutant concentrations, since the bioindicator responses can be intensified or restricted by climatic variations. In southeastern Brazil, there are two regions affected by air pollution, where the Atlantic Forest remains and should be preserved. Consequently, both areas have been monitored by biomonitoring procedures using standardized and tropical plants. The industrial complex settled in Cubatão is one of the world's most famous examples of environmental pollution and degradation, with consequent decline of the Atlantic Forest. An oil refinery is among the most polluting industries in the Cubatão region. The other region is located in the Metropolitan Region of Campinas (MRC). The MRC has been affected by high levels of air pollutants originated from road traffic and is responsible for over 80% of CO, NOx, and hydrocarbon emissions and develops industrial activities that emit about 70% of the particulate matter present in the region. Both regions are distinguished by the climate, despite the fact that they are only about 130 km far from each other. Several studies carried out by our group in these regions aimed to establish the best native tree species and respective potential biomarkers for future assessment of pollution effects on tropical Forests. We present a critical review about the efficiency of native species compared to standardized bioindicator plants considering antioxidant defense system, nutrient accumulation, and microscopic aspects when exposed to atmospheric pollutants and climate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29802616What 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.