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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Pathogen Decay during Managed Aquifer Recharge at Four Sites with Different Geochemical Characteristics and Recharge Water Sources
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Environmental Quality, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2134/jeq2015.03.0118 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. P. S. Sidhu, S. Toze, L. Hodgers, K. Barry, D. Page, Y. Li, P. Dillon |
| Abstract |
Recycling of stormwater water and treated effluent via managed aquifer recharge (MAR) has often been hampered because of perceptions of low microbiological quality of recovered water and associated health risks. The goal of this study was to assess the removal of selected pathogens in four large-scale MAR schemes and to determine the influence of aquifer characteristics, geochemistry, and type of recharge water on the pathogen survival times. Bacterial pathogens tested in this study had the shortest one log removal time (, <3 d), followed by oocysts (, <120 d), with enteric viruses having the biggest variability in removal times (, 18 to >200 d). Human adenovirus and rotavirus were relatively persistent under anaerobic conditions (, >200 d). Human adenovirus survived longer than all the other enteric virus tested in the study and hence could be used as a conservative indicator for virus removal in groundwater during MAR. The results suggest that site-specific subsurface conditions such as groundwater chemistry can have considerable influence on the decay rates of enteric pathogens and that viruses are likely to be the critical pathogens from a public health perspective. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 19% |
| Researcher | 13 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 15 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 17 | 23% |
| Engineering | 15 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 11% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 7 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 17 | 23% |
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 30 October 2015.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Environmental Quality
#2,617
of 2,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,166
of 276,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Environmental Quality
#20
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 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 2,987 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 276,791 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.