Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31704566›Full record

ArticleEnvironment international2020

An integrative method for identification and prioritization of constituents of concern in produced water from onshore oil and gas extraction.

Cloelle Danforth, Weihsueh A Chiu, Ivan Rusyn, Kim Schultz, Ashley Bolden, Carol Kwiatkowski, Elena Craft

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environment international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Viscoelastic Properties of Produced Water Emulsions.Energy & fuels : an American Chemical Society journal · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Recovery of Petroleum Brine-Contaminated Soil byTropical life sciences research · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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.

Cloelle DanforthEnvironmental Defense Fund, 2060 Broadway, Suite 300, Boulder, CO 80302, USA. Electronic address: cdanforth@edf.org.
Weihsueh A ChiuDepartment of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, Texas A&M University, 4458 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843, USA. Electronic address: wchiu@cvm.tamu.edu.
Ivan RusynDepartment of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, Texas A&M University, 4458 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843, USA. Electronic address: irusyn@cvm.tamu.edu.
Kim SchultzThe Endocrine Disruption Exchange, PO Box 54, Eckert, CO 81418, USA. Electronic address: kim@tedx.org.
Ashley BoldenThe Endocrine Disruption Exchange, PO Box 54, Eckert, CO 81418, USA. Electronic address: ashley.bolden@colorado.edu.
Carol KwiatkowskiThe Endocrine Disruption Exchange, PO Box 54, Eckert, CO 81418, USA. Electronic address: carolkw@tedx.org.
Elena CraftEnvironmental Defense Fund, 301 Congress Ave #1300, Austin, TX 78701, USA. Electronic address: ecraft@edf.org.

Funding

Single cell, multi-parametric high throughput platform to classify endocrine disruptor potential of mixturesP42ES027704 · NIEHS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Weihsueh A Chiu · 2017 to 2026
$21.2M
Texas A&M Center for Environmental Health Research (TiCER)P30ES029067 · NIEHS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Galen Newman · 2019 to 2026
$13.0M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES029067NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES027704
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the United States, onshore oil and gas extraction operations generate an estimated 900 billion gallons of produced water annually, making it the largest waste stream associated with upstream development of petroleum hydrocarbons. Management and disposal practices of produced water vary from deep well injection to reuse of produced water in agricultural settings. However, there is relatively little information with regard to the chemical or toxicological characteristics of produced water. A comprehensive literature review was performed, screening nearly 16,000 published articles, and identifying 129 papers that included data on chemicals detected in produced water. Searches for information on the potential ecotoxicological or mammalian toxicity of these chemicals revealed that the majority (56%) of these compounds have not been a subject of safety evaluation or mechanistic toxicology studies and 86% lack data to be used to complete a risk assessment, which underscores the lack of toxicological information for the majority of chemical constituents in produced water. The objective of this study was to develop a framework to identify potential constituents of concern in produced water, based on available and predicted toxicological hazard data, to prioritize these chemicals for monitoring, treatment, and research. In order to integrate available evidence to address gaps in toxicological hazard on the chemicals in produced water, we have catalogued available information from ecological toxicity studies, toxicity screening databases, and predicted toxicity values. A Toxicological Priority Index (ToxPi) approach was applied to integrate these various data sources. This research will inform stakeholders and decision-makers on the potential hazards in produced water. In addition, this work presents a method to prioritize compounds that, based on hazard and potential exposure, may be considered during various produced water reuse strategies to reduce possible human health risks and environmental impacts.

Indexed as

OilsWaterAnimalsHydrocarbonsRisk AssessmentUnited StatesWater Pollutants, ChemicalHydrocarbonsOilsWaterWater Pollutants, ChemicalEcotoxicologyHuman healthHydraulic fracturingOil-field wastewaterToxPiUnconventional

Identifiers

PMID31704566
PMCPMC7547527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.