↓ Skip to main content

Transport stability of pesticides and PAHs sequestered in polyethylene passive sampling devices

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science and Pollution Research, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
Transport stability of pesticides and PAHs sequestered in polyethylene passive sampling devices
Published in
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11356-016-6453-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carey E. Donald, Marc R. Elie, Brian W. Smith, Peter D. Hoffman, Kim A. Anderson

Abstract

Research using low-density polyethylene (LDPE) passive samplers has steadily increased over the past two decades. However, such research efforts remain hampered because of strict guidelines, requiring that these samplers be quickly transported in airtight metal or glass containers or foil wrapped on ice. We investigate the transport stability of model pesticides and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) with varying physicochemical properties using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) bags instead. Transport scenarios were simulated with transport times up to 14 days with temperatures ranging between -20 and 35 °C. Our findings show that concentrations of all model compounds examined were stable for all transport conditions tested, with mean recoveries ranging from 88 to 113 %. Furthermore, PTFE bags proved beneficial as reusable, lightweight, low-volume, low-cost alternatives to conventional containers. This documentation of stability will allow for more flexible transportation of LDPE passive samplers in an expanding range of research applications while maintaining experimental rigor.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Researcher 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 56%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 4 22%
Chemistry 2 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Unknown 11 61%
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 12 April 2016.
All research outputs
#13,558,274
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#2,484
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,245
of 330,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#62
of 205 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 330,757 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 205 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 69% of its contemporaries.