Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39582195›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2024

Spatial and Temporal Dynamics of Chemical and Microbial Contamination in Nonurban Floodwaters.

Minna Saaristo, Christopher P Johnstone, Phoebe Lewis, Simon Sharp, Timothy Chaston, Molly Hoak, Paul Leahy, Darren Cottam, Luke Noble, John Leeder and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Minna SaaristoEnvironment Protection Authority, EPA Science, Macleod, Victoria 3085, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9632-8611
Christopher P JohnstoneEnvironment Protection Authority, EPA Science, Macleod, Victoria 3085, Australia.
Phoebe LewisEnvironment Protection Authority, EPA Science, Macleod, Victoria 3085, Australia.
Simon SharpEnvironment Protection Authority, EPA Science, Macleod, Victoria 3085, Australia.
Timothy ChastonEnvironment Protection Authority, EPA Science, Macleod, Victoria 3085, Australia.
Molly HoakEnvironment Protection Authority, EPA Science, Macleod, Victoria 3085, Australia.
Paul LeahyEnvironment Protection Authority, EPA Science, Macleod, Victoria 3085, Australia.
Darren CottamEnvironment Protection Authority, EPA Science, Macleod, Victoria 3085, Australia.
Luke NobleEnviroDNA, Melbourne, Victoria 3056, Australia.
John LeederLeeder Analytical, Melbourne, Victoria 3078, Australia.
Mark Patrick TaylorEnvironment Protection Authority, EPA Science, Macleod, Victoria 3085, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During major flood events, waterborne contaminants are relatively poorly characterized. This is due to logistical difficulties associated with obtaining water samples in potentially dangerous flood conditions. Herein, we report analyses of water samples from a large, flooded landscape in Victoria, Australia, during a major flood event. We collected 83 samples from seven rivers and 18 river locations as far apart as 520 km. The sampling campaign covered a 26-day window, with 3 samples taken weekly from each site. Floodwater samples were analyzed for 778 contaminants and 544 microbial species were identified using eDNA. Our study shows that 85 contaminants were detected in floodwaters. Fungicides, phthalates, plant macronutrients, metal(loid)s and PPCPs were better explained by land uses, whereas herbicides and insecticides were explained by a mixture of land use and water flow data. Potentially pathogenic orders with the highest detection rates were Enterobacterales (82.4%), Mycobacteriales (70.6%) and Legionellales (58.8%). Contaminants and microbial signatures responded to rainfall, water flow and water level, demonstrating increased and varied human and environmental risks of exposure during the sampling window. Our work underlines the importance of rigorous and timely monitoring and provides an evidence-base for decision making during increasingly frequent and intense climate driven flood events.

Indexed as

Environmental MonitoringFloodsRiversWater Pollutants, ChemicalWater Pollutants, Chemicalclimate changecontaminants of emerging concernenvironmental DNAland use and surface water flow modelsmass flux

Identifiers

PMID39582195
PMCPMC11636212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.