↓ Skip to main content

Levels of Total Mercury in Tissues of Mallard Drakes from Industrialized Wetlands Area

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
Levels of Total Mercury in Tissues of Mallard Drakes from Industrialized Wetlands Area
Published in
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00128-015-1657-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Łukasz J. Binkowski, Anna Przystupińska, Włodzimierz Wojtaś

Abstract

The distribution of total mercury in the bodies of drake mallard ducks (Anas platyrhynchos) inhabiting an industrialized wetland area in southern Poland was studied. The median Hg concentration in tissue of various bones (0.017 µg/g w.w.) was statistically lower than the concentration found in muscle tissue (0.023 µg/g w.w.) and in internal organ tissue samples calculated across the whole range of organ types (0.036 µg/g w.w.). The median concentrations in muscle tissue and organ tissue were comparable. Significant differences within the examined bones were observed, with the beak accumulating the highest amount (0.105 µg/g w.w.). Concentrations were comparable in tissue from various muscles, whereas internal organ tissue displayed a significant variation. The highest median concentration was detected in the kidneys (0.109 µg/g w.w.). Correlations of Hg concentrations between major groups of tissue (i.e. bone, muscle and internal organs) were not statistically significant, but several significant relationships were noted between internal organs.

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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 42%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Student > Master 1 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 50%
Environmental Science 2 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Unknown 2 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,764,167
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#792
of 4,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,360
of 279,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#5
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,112 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 279,392 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.