ArticleRSC advances2019
Comparison of two sequential extraction procedures for tungsten fractionation in the tungsten mining soils.
Article in RSC advances, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 24-Epibrassinolide Enhanced Plant Antioxidant System and Cadmium Bioavailability Under Soil Cadmium Stress.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two sequential extraction procedures including Tessier and Wenzel schemes have been evaluated for the study of tungsten fractionation in soil samples adjacent to the World's largest and longest-operating tungsten mines in China. The efficiency and suitability of two methods and the corresponding extraction steps for partitioning tungsten were compared. Results showed the Tessier scheme classical for cation metals was inappropriate for tungsten fractionation. Although the percentage of readily bioavailable tungsten fractions extracted by the Tessier method is comparable to the Wenzel method, the Tessier scheme still has some drawbacks for partitioning tungsten mainly arising from the lack of selectivity of some of the reagents used. The Wenzel scheme has higher extraction recovery and efficiency than the Tessier method, especially for extracting amorphous and crystalline oxyhydroxides which were mainly responsible for tungsten retention. As a final conclusion, the study indicated that the Wenzel scheme should be more suitable for tungsten fractionation, but we need to make further improvement on the Wenzel scheme by supplementing the extraction stage for the oxidisable fraction to find a reliable and easy to use method to characterize tungsten forms in all soil samples to provide valuable information for risk assessment.
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.