↓ Skip to main content

Recent advances in conventional and contemporary methods for remediation of heavy metal-contaminated soils

Overview of attention for article published in 3 Biotech, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
168 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
258 Mendeley
Title
Recent advances in conventional and contemporary methods for remediation of heavy metal-contaminated soils
Published in
3 Biotech, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s13205-018-1237-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Swati Sharma, Sakshi Tiwari, Abshar Hasan, Varun Saxena, Lalit M. Pandey

Abstract

Remediation of heavy metal-contaminated soils has been drawing our attention toward it for quite some time now and a need for developing new methods toward reclamation has come up as the need of the hour. Conventional methods of heavy metal-contaminated soil remediation have been in use for decades and have shown great results, but they have their own setbacks. The chemical and physical techniques when used singularly generally generate by-products (toxic sludge or pollutants) and are not cost-effective, while the biological process is very slow and time-consuming. Hence to overcome them, an amalgamation of two or more techniques is being used. In view of the facts, new methods of biosorption, nanoremediation as well as microbial fuel cell techniques have been developed, which utilize the metabolic activities of microorganisms for bioremediation purpose. These are cost-effective and efficient methods of remediation, which are now becoming an integral part of all environmental and bioresource technology. In this contribution, we have highlighted various augmentations in physical, chemical, and biological methods for the remediation of heavy metal-contaminated soils, weighing up their pros and cons. Further, we have discussed the amalgamation of the above techniques such as physiochemical and physiobiological methods with recent literature for the removal of heavy metals from the contaminated soils. These combinations have showed synergetic effects with a many fold increase in removal efficiency of heavy metals along with economic feasibility.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 258 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 258 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 34 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 12%
Student > Master 25 10%
Researcher 18 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 5%
Other 30 12%
Unknown 106 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 33 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 10%
Engineering 18 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 6%
Chemistry 15 6%
Other 37 14%
Unknown 114 44%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 August 2021.
All research outputs
#17,981,442
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from 3 Biotech
#583
of 1,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,117
of 329,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age from 3 Biotech
#21
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,251 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 329,431 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.