| Title |
Bio-monitoring of Tissue Accumulation and Genotoxic Effect of Heavy Metals in Cyprinus carpio from River Kabul Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00128-017-2265-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Muhammad Siraj, Muhammad Khisroon, Ajmal Khan, Farrah Zaidi, Ahmad Ullah, Ghani Rahman |
| Abstract |
The study explored (I) the concentration of heavy metals in water samples (II) their bioaccumulation in common carp Cyprinus carpio (III) and the subsequent genotoxicity in the selected organs of carp; from river Kabul, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan. Except for Mercury (Hg) the water samples had all the heavy metals within permissible limits of recommended dietary allowance (RDA). Nonetheless a number of heavy metals (Zn, Ni, Cr, Cd, Pb and Hg) showed bioaccumulation at levels higher than permissible. Zinc (Zn) was the most while Cadmium (Cd) was the least accumulated metal in all tissue samples analyzed. The metal burden in different organs of C. carpio was in sequence of intestine > skin > liver > gills > muscle. The Comet assay established DNA damage in selected organs to be in accordance with metal burden; the most to least damage being in sequence of blood > intestine > skin > liver > gills > muscle. In conclusion assessment of DNA damage in the organs of C. carpio appears to be a useful bio-marker to evaluate genotoxic effects of heavy metal pollution. |
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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 4 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 17% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 April 2018.
All research outputs
#15,827,358
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#2,483
of 4,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,885
of 450,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#22
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,112 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 450,971 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.