ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2026
Differential prevalence of PFAS, PCBs and pesticides in liver of hunted game.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Free foraging game animals are constantly exposed to environmental pollutants and can therefore serve as bioindicators for these substances. However, they can also pose a health risk to humans if polluted meat of wild game animals enters the food chain. We analysed 219 potentially critical pollutants in 164 liver samples of hunted wild boar (Sus scrofa) and roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) from north-eastern Germany. Overall, 24 pollutants were detected and 16 of them were detected quantitatively. PCBs, PFAS and rodenticides were more frequent and present in far higher concentrations in wild boar than in roe deer. Only for rodenticides can it be assumed that there is no health risk for the game animals; otherwise, no statement can be made due to a lack of reference data. Risks for human consumers of liver arise from concentrations in wild boar liver exceeding the tolerable weekly intake for PFAS by up to 17 times and in individual cases the acute reference dose for brodifacoum by up to 485%. In contrast, the health risk of eating game meat is usually negligible, as chemical residues generally accumulate in the liver and less in muscle tissue. The significance of up to 12 co-occurring residues for animal and human health is still an open research issue.
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.