ArticleScientific reports2024
A comparative study of foliar particulate matter wash-off from plants under natural and simulated rain conditions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Urban greening can reduce concentrations of particulate matter (PM). However, most of the PM is deposited temporarily on foliage and can be removed by precipitation. Due to the unpredictability and randomness of natural rain and the complexity of environmental conditions, the effect of rainfall on PM removal from foliage is usually examined using simulated rain. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of natural and simulated rain on washing off PM deposited on the foliage of seventeen plant species (evergreen/deciduous trees and shrubs, herbaceous plants). Regardless of the PM fraction studied, simulated rain washed off a larger fraction of the PM than natural rain. A novel finding is the differential role played by various plant characteristics in determining the effectiveness of PM wash off under natural and simulated rain conditions, with their influence being more pronounced under natural rainfall. The type of rainfall and PM size fraction influenced the effectiveness of the PM wash-off from different plant groups. Natural rain was more effective at removing PM from evergreen trees, while simulated rainfall was more effective at removing PM from deciduous shrubs and herbaceous plants. The results obtained from this study suggest that simulated rain does not reflect the effects of natural precipitation on the processes removing PM from leaves, and therefore should not be used to explain phenomena that occur in realistic conditions.
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.