↓ Skip to main content

Solid-phase extraction as sample preparation of water samples for cell-based and other in vitro bioassays

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Solid-phase extraction as sample preparation of water samples for cell-based and other in vitro bioassays
Published in
Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts, January 2018
DOI 10.1039/c7em00555e
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peta A Neale, Werner Brack, Selim Aït-Aïssa, Wibke Busch, Juliane Hollender, Martin Krauss, Emmanuelle Maillot-Maréchal, Nicole A Munz, Rita Schlichting, Tobias Schulze, Bernadette Vogler, Beate I Escher

Abstract

In vitro bioassays are increasingly used for water quality monitoring. Surface water samples often need to be enriched to observe an effect and solid-phase extraction (SPE) is commonly applied for this purpose. The applied methods are typically optimised for the recovery of target chemicals and not for effect recovery for bioassays. A review of the few studies that have evaluated SPE recovery for bioassays showed a lack of experimentally determined recoveries. Therefore, we systematically measured effect recovery of a mixture of 579 organic chemicals covering a wide range of physicochemical properties that were spiked into a pristine water sample and extracted using large volume solid-phase extraction (LVSPE). Assays indicative of activation of xenobiotic metabolism, hormone receptor-mediated effects and adaptive stress responses were applied, with non-specific effects determined through cytotoxicity measurements. Overall, effect recovery was found to be similar to chemical recovery for the majority of bioassays and LVSPE blanks had no effect. Multi-layer SPE exhibited greater recovery of spiked chemicals compared to LVSPE, but the blanks triggered cytotoxicity at high enrichment. Chemical recovery data together with single chemical effect data were used to retrospectively estimate with reverse recovery modelling that there was typically less than 30% effect loss expected due to reduced SPE recovery in published surface water monitoring studies. The combination of targeted experiments and mixture modelling clearly shows the utility of SPE as a sample preparation method for surface water samples, but also emphasizes the need for adequate controls when extraction methods are adapted from chemical analysis workflows.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Master 4 6%
Professor 3 5%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 13 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 19 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 10%
Chemistry 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Chemical Engineering 3 5%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 17 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 05 March 2018.
All research outputs
#15,165,190
of 25,756,911 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts
#1,156
of 1,872 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,854
of 452,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts
#43
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,756,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,872 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. 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 452,073 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.