| Title |
Phytotoxicity of CeO2 nanoparticles on radish plant (Raphanus sativus)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-017-8880-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xin Gui, Mengmeng Rui, Youhong Song, Yuhui Ma, Yukui Rui, Peng Zhang, Xiao He, Yuanyuan Li, Zhiyong Zhang, Liming Liu |
| Abstract |
Cerium oxide nanoparticles (CeO2 NPs) have been considered as one type of emerging contaminants that pose great potential risks to the environment and human health. The effect of CeO2 NPs on plant-edible parts and health evaluation remains is necessary and urgently to be developed. In this study, we cultivated radish in Sigma CeO2 NP (<25 nm)-amended soils across a series of concentration treatments, i.e., 0 mg/kg as the control and 10, 50, and 100 mg/kg CeO2 NPs. The results showed that CeO2 NPs accelerated the fresh biomass accumulation of radish plant; especially in the treatment of 50 mg/kg CeO2 NPs, root expansion was increased by 2.2 times as much as the control. In addition, the relative chlorophyll content enhanced by 12.5, 12.9, and 12.2% was compared to control on 40 cultivation days. CeO2 NPs were mainly absorbed by the root and improved the activity of antioxidant enzyme system to scavenge the damage of free radicals in radish root and leaf. In addition, this study also indicated that the nanoparticles might enter the food chain through the soil into the edible part of the plant, which will be a potential threat to human health. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Unknown | 12 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 30% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 14 | 47% |
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 06 June 2017.
All research outputs
#19,440,618
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#5,443
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,235
of 312,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#110
of 190 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 312,985 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 190 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.