ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2020
Genotoxicity and phytotoxicity comparison of cigarette butt with cigarette ash.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Narrative Review of Metallomic Studies: Revealing the Toxic Metal Burden in Tobacco Smokers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Cigarette smoking and alcohol-related liver disease.Liver research (Beijing, China) · 2024Review
- Article
- The fate of leaked heavy metals in the urban environment under different persistence and precipitation scenarios.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Spatial and temporal variation of CBPI and leakage of heavy metals from cigarette butts into the urban environment.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Contrasting tourism regimes due to the COVID-19 lockdown reveal varied genomic toxicity in a tropical beach in the Southern Atlantic.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2022Article
- Challenges on the recycling of cigarette butts.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Review
- Toxicity of cigarette butts and possible recycling solutions-a literature review.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Review
- Impact of cigarette butts on bacterial community structure in soil.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The damage potential of cigarette butt and cigarette ash was determined and compared using genotoxicity and phytotoxicity assessments. The concentrations of five heavy metals, As, Cr, Cd, Pb, and Ni, were determined in both cigarette butt and ash leachates to find out if the results of heavy metals are in parallel with toxicity findings. Cigarette ashes and cigarette butts were soaked in distilled water for 7 days. Six leachate butt concentrations, including 200, 100, 50, 25, 12.5, and 6.25 piece/L, were examined. HUVEC cells (human umbilical vein endothelial cells) were exposed to these dilution series for genotoxicity, and Vicia faba seeds were exposed to the same dilution series for phytotoxicity assessments. Three parameters of genotoxicity, including tail length, %DNA in tail, and tail moment, were obtained by the comet assay method, and three parameters of phytotoxicity, including germination rate, root length, and water content percentage, were employed. The results showed that cigarette ash at the concentrations of 50, 25, 12.5, and 6.25 pc/L brings about DNA damage. Meanwhile, cigarette butt causes DNA damage at the concentrations of 100, 50, 25, and 12.5 pc/L. The highest concentrations (200 pc/L for cigarette butt and 200 and 100 pc/L for cigarette ash) were considered lethal for HUVEC cells. Besides, the levels of genotoxicity in the cigarette ash were twice as high as those in the cigarette butt. The Vicia faba phytotoxicity test demonstrated a germination rate restriction from 100 to 52 and 100 to 0% for cigarette butt and cigarette ash, respectively. It also caused a reduction in the length of roots from 35 to 7.85 and 3 mm for cigarette butt and cigarette ash, respectively. The moisture amounts of cigarette remnants had a decline from 93.14 to 44.61 and 36.72% for cigarette butt and cigarette ash, respectively. Concentrations of As, Cr, Cd, Pb, and Ni were 17.45, 2.5, 0.15, 6, and 0.62 ppb in the butt leachate and 7.21, 2.64, 0.29, 13.61, and 1.24 ppb in the ash leachate, respectively, indicating that heavy metals could explain the higher toxicity of cigarette ash. Based on the present study, cigarette ash imposes not only higher levels of genotoxicity and phytotoxicity but also more values of toxic heavy metals on our planet. Thus, cigarette ash plays a major role in environmental pollution, and the importance of cigarette ashes should receive attention even more than cigarette butts. This paper casts new light on the toxic impacts of cigarette ash.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.