Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31297468›Full record

ArticleNanoImpact2019

Environmental fate of multiwalled carbon nanotubes and graphene oxide across different aquatic ecosystems.

Brian Avant, Dermont Bouchard, Xiaojun Chang, Hsin-Se Hsieh, Brad Acrey, Yanlai Han, Jessica Spear, Richard Zepp, Christopher D Knightes

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NanoImpact, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Environmental effects of stratospheric ozone depletion, UV radiation and interactions with climate change: UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, update 2019.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2020
    Review
  18. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Brian AvantOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Athens, GA 30605, United States of America.
Dermont BouchardUSEPA Office of Research and Development, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Athens, GA 30605, United States of America.
Xiaojun ChangNational Research Council, Athens, GA 30605, United States of America.
Hsin-Se HsiehNational Research Council, Athens, GA 30605, United States of America.
Brad AcreyOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Athens, GA 30605, United States of America.
Yanlai HanOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Athens, GA 30605, United States of America.
Jessica SpearStudent Service, Athens, GA 30605, United States of America.
Richard ZeppUSEPA Office of Research and Development, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Athens, GA 30605, United States of America.
Christopher D KnightesUSEPA Office of Research and Development, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Athens, GA 30605, United States of America.
Environmental Protection Agency · USOak Ridge Institute for Science and EducationNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine · US

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The industrial use and widespread application of carbon-based nanomaterials have caused a rapid increase in their production over the last decades. However, toxicity of these materials is not fully known and is still being investigated for potential human and ecological health risks. Detecting carbon-based nanomaterials in the environment using current analytical methods is problematic, making environmental fate and transport modeling a practical way to estimate environmental concentrations and assess potential ecological risks. The Water Quality Analysis Simulation Program 8 (WASP8) is a dynamic, spatially resolved fate and transport model for simulating exposure concentrations in surface waters and sediments. Recently, WASP has been updated to incorporate processes for simulating the fate and transport of nanomaterials including heteroaggregation and phototransformation. This study examines the fate and transport of multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT), graphene oxide (GO) and reduced graphene oxide (rGO) in four aquatic ecosystems in the southeastern United States. Sites include a seepage lake, a coastal plains river, a piedmont river and an unstratified, wetland lake. A hypothetical 50-year release is simulated for each site-nanomaterial pair to analyze nanomaterial distribution between the water column and sediments. For all nanomaterials, 99% of the mass loaded moves though systems of high and low residence times without being heteroaggregated and deposited in the sediments. However, significant accumulation in the sediments does occur over longer periods of time. Results show that GO and rGO had the highest mass fraction in the water column of all four sites. MWCNT were found predominantly in the sediments of the piedmont river and seepage lake but were almost entirely contained in the water column of the coastal plains river and wetland lake. Simulated recovery periods following the release estimate 37+ years for lakes and 1-4 years for rivers to reduce sediment nanomaterial concentrations by 50% suggesting that carbon-based nanomaterials have the potential for long-term ecological effects.

Indexed as

Fate and transportGraphene oxideMultiwalled carbon nanotubesNanomaterialsWASP

Identifiers

PMID31297468
PMCPMC6621604
OpenAlexW2901067593

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.