| Title |
Rapid ecotoxicological bioassay using delayed fluorescence in the marine cyanobacterium Cyanobium sp. (NIES-981)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ecotoxicology, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10646-016-1718-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Takahiro Yamagishi, Masakazu Katsumata, Haruyo Yamaguchi, Yohei Shimura, Masanobu Kawachi, Hiroshi Koshikawa, Yoshifumi Horie, Norihisa Tatarazako |
| Abstract |
The use of delayed fluorescence intensity as an endpoint for rapid estimation of the effective concentration (ECx) has been reported as an alternative to standard growth inhibition (at 72 h after exposure) in some algal species including Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata. In marine algae, although an approach of bioassaying using delayed fluorescence measurements has not been performed yet, its development would provide many benefits for marine environmental risk assessment. In this study, we selected marine cyanobacterium Cyanobium sp. (NIES-981) as our test algal species and demonstrated that this species is valid for the standard growth inhibition test based on criteria provide by Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development guidelines. Furthermore, standard inhibition tests and shorter period test using DF were performed in NIES-981 using five chemicals (3,5-DCP, simazine, diflufenican, K2Cr2O7, and CuSO4), and their EC50 and low-toxic-effect values (EC10, EC5, and NOEC) were determined from two dose-response curves. Based on comparisons of the two dose-response curves and the EC50 values, we conclude that DF intensity is useful as an endpoint for rapid estimation of EC50 in NIES-981. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 33% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 19% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 33% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 14% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2016.
All research outputs
#20,341,859
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from Ecotoxicology
#975
of 1,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#278,673
of 321,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecotoxicology
#24
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,477 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,166 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.