ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2025
A category approach to characterize river sites based on non-target screening and target analysis.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to characterize monitoring sites with regard to their contaminating sources and to identify potential pollution hotspots as well as previously unknown compounds. Several evaluation methodologies were combined via a category approach consisting of site-specific detections using a combination of an extended target analysis via GC/MS and LC/MS/MS, NTS using LC-reversed phase high resolution MS, and suspect screening via spectral libraries. Furthermore, we considered the fraction of treated wastewater, the agricultural land use, and industry located in the vicinity. In order to evaluate our concept, more than 520 water samples of rivers from 79 locations throughout Saxony were analyzed by target analysis and NTS. Overall, a very good comparability between the results of target analysis and NTS was observed for pharmaceuticals and pesticides. In a first step, NTS data were used to identify hotspots of pollution with organic micropollutants. By this approach, 13 of 79 sites were characterized as "anomalous" as defined by empirical thresholds. More than 350 compounds could be identified using our spectral data library. In a second step, features of two sampling sites, which were likely contaminated by treated industrial wastewater, were investigated in detail, leading to the identification of four currently unknown compounds. These were cyclohexyldiethanolamine (CDA), 2,4,6-tri-(6-amino-hexanoic acid)-1,3,5-triazine (THAT), 2-(dibutylamino)ethanol, and 3,6,9-trioxaundecanedioic with estimated concentrations of up to 100 µg/L in rivers and streams using a semi-quantitative approach. However, based on the NTS database obtained, the identification of further currently unknown compounds can be easily done. The suggested category approach was also suitable to identify pollution hotspots of organic chemicals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41128784What 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.