ArticleToxics2026
Optimising Hydrocarbon Extraction from Soil Using Mixed-Surfactant Systems.
Article in Toxics, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In industrial settings, one of the key environmental challenges is the remediation of soil contaminated by hydrocarbons. Washing the soil with surfactants mobilises and extracts these compounds, making them easier to treat. As it enables the recovery and reuse of soil within sustainable production processes, this technique is part of the circular economy. Soil-washing experiments using surfactants were carried out to determine whether a mixture of anionic and non-ionic surfactants could improve the remediation of soil contaminated by gasoline and diesel fuel compared to the use of a single surfactant. Four surfactants were used (non-ionic: polyoxyethylene lauryl ether and polyoxyethylene (80) sorbitan monooleate; anionic: sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate and sodium dodecyl sulfate). The aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbon fractions (C6-C8, C8-C10, C10-C12, C12-C16, C16-C21 and C21-C35) of gasoline and diesel fuel were analysed. Sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate was selected for the purpose of preparing mixtures with the other two non-ionic surfactants, polyoxyethylene lauryl ether and polyoxyethylene (80) sorbitan monooleate. These surfactant mixtures demonstrated significantly higher removal rates than sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate alone. Mixtures of sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate and polyoxyethylene lauryl ether achieved hydrocarbon extraction of between 61% and 68%, while sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate-polyoxyethylene (80) sorbitan monooleate mixtures obtained extraction of between 58% and 66%. Analysis of the gasoline and diesel hydrocarbon fractions indicated that smaller molecules desorb more easily than larger ones and that aromatics desorb more easily than aliphatics. Furthermore, the mixtures increased the extraction of both aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons, particularly the lighter compounds. The variation on removal rates within the hydrocarbon ranges may be related to the octanol-water partition coefficient (K
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.