ArticleScientific reports2025
Weed control and environmental risk assessment of herbicides in a Brazilian Atlantic forest railway ecosystem.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Weeds along railway lines pose serious operational and environmental challenges, particularly in protected natural areas where vegetation management must balance efficacy and ecological safety. The objective of this study was to select herbicides that are effective in controlling weeds and to evaluate the associated environmental risks. The experiment was conducted on a stretch of railway line in the Serra do Mar State Park, São Paulo, Brazil, with the application of single and mixed herbicides (glyphosate, indaziflam, imazapyr and saflufenacil). A phytosociological survey of the weed flora was performed, and the overall weed control and the control of the most common species (Glycine max, Paspalum spp, Commelina spp. and Digitaria spp.) were evaluated at 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 180 days after application. For the analysis of possible environmental risks associated with the use of these herbicides, quantification of the active ingredients and their most important metabolites in soil and water was performed. The weed community on the railroad was predominantly composed of exotic species. The combination of pre- and postemergent herbicides provided the highest percentages of control with the longest weed-free period. The herbicide concentrations detected in the soil and water on the railway line and in the immediate vicinity were much lower than the initial concentrations, with no observed effect concentration (NOEC) for the most sensitive organisms found in the literature. The use of these herbicides, under the conditions evaluated, was efficient in the management of weeds and was environmentally safe.
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.