ReviewEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2021
Feather heavy metal contamination in various species of waterbirds from Asia: a review.
Review in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of taxonomy and feeding guilds on waterbirds of the Southern Caspian Sea, Iran.PloS one · 2026Article
- Birds as Environmental Bioindicators of Genotoxicity in Brazilian Cerrado Farmlands: An In Situ Approach.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Heavy metal concentrations in feathers and metabolomic profiles in Pacific black ducks (Anas superciliosa) from Southeastern Australia.Environmental toxicology and chemistry · 2025Article
- Species Differences and Tissue Distribution of Heavy Metal Residues in Wild Birds.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Article
- Assessment of the Toxic Effects of Heavy Metals on Waterbirds and Their Prey Species in Freshwater Habitats.Toxics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The amounts of certain heavy metals in waterfowl fluctuate depending on a number of factors. The use of feathers in heavy metal contamination studies is gaining popularity for several reasons, including the lack of need for deep freezing for sample preservation, the fact that it is a non-destructive, non-invasive method that does not require killing an individual, and the ability to predict lead and cadmium concentrations in internal tissues. A total of 22 publications from eight Asian countries including Pakistan, China, Hong Kong, India, Iran, South Korea, Indonesia, and Japan were identified and analysed in this study. The highest number of study sites were found from Pakistan (n = 12), followed by China (n = 9), Hong Kong, South Korea, and India (n = 7) each. A total of 10 heavy metals, viz cadmium, chromium, lead, copper, nickel, zinc, iron, mercury, selenium, and arsenic, have been identified for the review. Mercury (0.17-79.66 ppm) has been studied in all 44 species, whereas selenium (0.98-4.88 ppm) has only been studied in five species. Mercury (8.6 ppm) contamination is highest in Painted Stork from India. Cadmium, lead, copper, and arsenic contamination was detected in the highest concentrations in Cattle Egret and Indian Pond Heron. The highest contamination of cadmium (41.1 ppm), lead (296 ppm), and arsenic (20 ppm) were found in Cattle Egret from Pakistan. Chromium, nickel, and zinc contamination was highest in waders such as Marsh Sandpiper (114.7 ppm), Little Ringed Plover (114.8 ppm), and Little Stint (328.4 ppm), respectively from India. Black-tailed Gull from South Korea had the highest contamination of Iron (4055.55 ppm) and selenium (7.55 ppm). Feather analysis is not an alternative of internal tissue analysis. It should be considered as an initial warning of the hazardous effects of the heavy metals in the waterbirds.
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.