Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30666495›Full record

ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2019

Factors influencing fish mercury concentrations in Iowa rivers.

Nathan Mills, Michael J Weber, Clay L Pierce, Darcy Cashatt

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2019. 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
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nathan MillsDepartment of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, 339 Science Hall II, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, 50011, USA.
Michael J WeberDepartment of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, 339 Science Hall II, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, 50011, USA. mjw@iastate.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0430-3087
Clay L PierceU.S. Geological Survey, Iowa Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, 50011, USA.
Darcy CashattIowa Department of Natural Resources, 15053 Hatchery Pl., Moravia, IA, 52571, USA.
Iowa State University · USIowa Department of Natural Resources · USUnited States Geological Survey · US

Funding

Iowa Department of Natural Resources 14CRDFBFSCHO-0002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fish mercury concentrations have received considerable attention due to human health implications. Fish mercury concentrations are variable within and among systems due to a suite of biotic and abiotic influences that vary among regions and are difficult to predict. Understanding factors associated with variability in fish mercury concentrations would help guide consumption advisories. Mercury concentrations in channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus, n = 205), flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris, n = 123), northern pike (Esox lucius, n = 60), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu, n = 176), and walleye (Sander vitreus, n = 176) were assessed in ten Iowa rivers and relationships with land use, water chemistry, and fish characteristics were explored. Mercury concentrations were generally low (mean among all species = 0.17 mg/kg, n = 740) but higher in flathead catfish, northern pike, smallmouth bass, and walleye than channel catfish and were positively related to fish length, age, trophic position, and δ

Indexed as

Environmental MonitoringAnimalsCatfishesEsocidaeFemaleIowaMaleMercuryPerciformesRiversWater Pollutants, ChemicalMercuryWater Pollutants, ChemicalBioaccumulationConsumption advisoriesContaminantEcoregionTrophic positionWater chemistry

Identifiers

PMID30666495
OpenAlexW2914876336

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.