ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2020
Acute ecotoxicity and genotoxicity assessment of two wastewater treatment units.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physicochemical and ecotoxicological approaches for Moknine Continental Sebkha in Tunisia.Journal of water and health · 2024Article
- Removal of Chromium (III) and Reduction in Toxicity in a Primary Tannery Effluent Using Two Floating Macrophytes.Toxics · 2024Article
- Multi-taxon trends and the application of genotoxic biomarkers in the analysis of effluents from sewage treatment plant.Heliyon · 2023Review
- Hybrid constructed wetlands integrated with microbial fuel cells and reactive bed filter for wastewater treatment and bioelectricity generation.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Exploiting the Potential of Supported Magnetic Nanomaterials as Fenton-Like Catalysts for Environmental Applications.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Acute toxicity of piggery effluent and veterinary pharmaceutical cocktail on freshwater organisms.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2021Article
- Floating treatment wetlands integrated with microbial fuel cell for the treatment of urban wastewaters and bioenergy generation.The Science of the total environment · 2021Article
- Up-Flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) Technology for Energy Recovery: A Review on State-of-the-Art and Recent Technological Advances.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Water contamination by discharge of untreated or poorly treated wastewater into water bodies is a current issue that may cause harm to humans. Water quality assessment targets general parameters, which often misleads to underestimation of their implication in the environment. Acute and genotoxicity assays using Daphnia magna is a reliable tool for testing deleterious effects of wastewater exposure. This paper aimed at evaluating acute ecotoxicity as well as genotoxicity of a biological treatment system composed by an anaerobic bioreactor (AR), algal turf scrubber (ATS), followed by two downflow constructed wetlands (CW). The university's wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) composed by an equalization tank (ET), an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB), followed by an aerobic bioreactor (AB) was also assessed for acute and genotoxicity. Our results showed the acute ecotoxicity ranged from moderately to extremely toxic, and from nontoxic to moderately toxic for ET and AB. For AR, most samples were moderately toxic. The outflow from ATS and CW's tanks completely eliminated acute toxicity and genotoxicity evidencing that the proposed system combining ATS and vertical CWs is suitable for treating sanitary wastewater.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31940141What 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.