| Title |
Reproductive toxicity of lead, cadmium, and phthalate exposure in men
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-014-2986-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Niraj Pant, G. Kumar, A. D. Upadhyay, D. K. Patel, Y. K. Gupta, P. K. Chaturvedi |
| Abstract |
Environmental toxicants viz lead or cadmium and phthalate esters (di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate [DEHP], dibutyl phthalate [DBP], and diethyl phthalate [DEP]) widely found in different environmental strata are linked to deteriorating male reproductive health. The objective was to assess the relationships between the seminal lead, cadmium, and phthalate (DEHP, DBP, DEP) concentrations at environmental level and serum hormone levels and semen quality in non-occupationally exposed men and specify the effect of individual and combined exposure of toxicants on semen quality. A study of 60 male partners of couples attending the Andrology Laboratory of the Reproductive Biology Department, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, India for semen analysis to assess their inability to achieve a pregnancy was selected for the study. The results of univariate and stepwise multiple regression analysis in the unadjusted model showed a significant correlation between lead or cadmium and phthalates DEHP/DBP/DEP and sperm motility, sperm concentration, and DNA damage. After adjusting for potential confounders, an association with lead or DEHP was only observed. The present data shows that lead (Pb) or cadmium (Cd) or phthalates might independently contribute to decline in semen quality and induce DNA damage. Phthalates might influence reproductive hormone testosterone. These findings are significant in light of the fact that men are exposed to a volley of chemicals; however, due to the small sample size, our finding needs to be confirmed in a larger population. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 103 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 14% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 30 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 14% |
| Environmental Science | 11 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 18 | 17% |
| Unknown | 32 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 02 May 2019.
All research outputs
#1,010,311
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#141
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,159
of 230,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#2
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
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 230,412 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.