ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2021
Biomonitoring of surface water quality in the Chopim River within the Conservation Unit Campos de Palmas Wildlife Refuge, southern Brazil.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2021. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Campos de Palmas Wildlife Refuge (RVS-CP) is a full protection conservation unit (CU) formed by private properties. The present study aimed to use the bioindicators Allium cepa L. (cytotoxicity and mutagenicity tests) and Eisenia fetida (avoidance test) to assess the quality of surface water of the Chopim River within the RVS-CP area and its surroundings during the four seasons of the year. To do so, water samples were collected at five points, four inside the RVS-CP area and a fifth point outside thereof. Samples from all sampling points had cytotoxic effect on A. cepa in at least one season of the year. Such a finding may be related to inadequate management practices (without land-use control) in the areas surrounding the sampling points such as forestry, native fields, pastures, agriculture, and housing areas. As for the animal bioindicator (E. fetida), only points 1 (in the winter) and 5 (in the autumn) were toxic. Concerning mutagenicity, points 1 and 4 (in the spring), 1 and 2 (in the summer), and 3 (in the autumn) showed mutagenic effect on A. cepa meristematic cells, therefore only within the RVS-CP area. Overall, these results show that biomonitoring can be an ally of the residents of the RVS-CP area in controlling management practices, aiming to bring together economic support and conservation of resources, especially water.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34669048What 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.