ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2020
Ecological risk assessment (ERA) based on contaminated groundwater to predict potential impacts to a wetland ecosystem.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
To assess the ecological risk resulting from an accidental gasoline spill upstream from a wetland, groundwater and sediment sampling was carried out during two campaigns at the 48th and 52nd months after the spill had occurred. In total, 21 groundwater monitoring wells in the affected area were sampled plus an additional reference well located upstream from the accident location. Seven sediment sampling points were selected inside the wetland, plus a reference point upstream from the accident. Physicochemical parameters, BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, m-xylene, p-xylene and o-xylene) and metal concentrations were analysed to estimate the chemical risk. Acute (Allivibrio fischeri, Daphnia similis, Hyalella azteca) and chronic (Artemia salina and Desmodesmus subspicatus) toxicity assays were performed with groundwater and sediments elutriate to determine the ecotoxicological risk. Results from groundwater indicated an extreme chemical level of risk in14 out of 21 monitoring wells. These 14 wells also exhibited free-phase gasoline and lead (Pb) concentrations above the threshold values adopted by this study. The presence of Pb, however, could not be associated with the gasoline accident. High acute and chronic toxicities were reported for the majority of wells. Conversely, the risks associated with the sediments were considered low in most sampling points, and the ecotoxicity found could not be related to the presence of gasoline. Groundwater flow modelling results have evidenced the migration of the contamination plume towards the wetland. Thus, to prevent contamination from reaching the protected area, more effective groundwater clean-up techniques are still required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32363457What 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.