Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42587234›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2026

Probabilistic comparisons of grey water footprint models for herbicide mixtures in Brazilian sugarcane.

Lourival Costa Paraíba

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Lourival Costa ParaíbaEmbrapa Meio Ambiente, Rodovia SP-340, Km 127,5, Tanquinho Velho, Jaguariúna, São Paulo, 13918-110, Brazil. lourival.paraiba@embrapa.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6799-0617

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The grey water footprint (GWF) quantifies freshwater pollution from pesticide use. The H-model relies on regulatory concentration limits, while the P-model uses ecotoxicological endpoints and concentration addition (CA); independent action (IA) across modes of action (MOA) remains underexplored. We present a fully re-verified probabilistic Monte Carlo comparison of CA and HRAC-based IA P-models for 17 herbicides applied to Brazilian sugarcane, built exclusively from traceable, source-cited inputs, including a soil attenuation factor recomputed from first principles and maximum acceptable concentrations compiled from five source tiers. Total grey water footprint is

Indexed as

HerbicidesSaccharumWater Pollutants, ChemicalBrazilEnvironmental MonitoringMonte Carlo MethodHerbicidesWater Pollutants, ChemicalCumulative risk assessmentGWFHerbicide mixtureH-modelHRACMonte CarloP-model

Identifiers

PMID42587234
PMCPMC13503512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.