ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Sensors for Biomass Monitoring in Vegetated Green Infrastructure: A Review.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Zr-based metal-organic frameworks for colorimetric sensing applications.RSC applied interfaces · 2026Review
- The IoT and AI in Agriculture: The Time Is Now-A Systematic Review of Smart Sensing Technologies.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bioretention cells, or rain gardens, can effectively reduce many contaminants in polluted stormwater through phytoremediation and bioremediation. The vegetated soil structure develops bacterial communities both within the soil and around the vegetation roots that play a significant role in the bioremediative process. Prediction of a bioretention cell's performance and efficacy is essential to the design process, operation, and maintenance throughout the design life of the cell. One of the key hurdles to these important issues and, therefore, to appropriate designs, is the lack of effective and inexpensive devices for monitoring and quantitatively assessing this bioremediative process in the field. This research reviews the available technologies for biomass monitoring and assesses their potential for quantifying bioremediative processes in rain gardens. The methods are discussed based on accuracy and calibration requirements, potential for use in situ, in real-time, and for characterizing biofilm formation in media that undergoes large fluctuations in nutrient supply. The methods discussed are microscopical, piezoelectric, fiber-optic, thermometric, and electrochemical. Microscopical methods are precluded from field use but would be essential to the calibration and verification of any field-based sensor. Piezoelectric, fiber-optic, thermometric, and some of the electrochemical-based methods reviewed come with limitations by way of support mechanisms or insufficient detection limits. The impedance-based electrochemical method shows the most promise for applications in rain gardens, and it is supported by microscopical methods for calibration and validation.
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.