| Title |
Multivariate analysis of mineral constituents of edible Parasol Mushroom (Macrolepiota procera) and soils beneath fruiting bodies collected from Northern Poland
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-011-0574-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Magdalena Gucia, Grażyna Jarzyńska, Elżbieta Rafał, Magdalena Roszak, Anna K. Kojta, Irena Osiej, Jerzy Falandysz |
| Abstract |
Caps and stipes of 141 fruiting bodies of Parasol Mushroom (Macrolepiota procera) and surface layer of soils collected from 11 spatially distant and background (pristine) areas in Northern Poland were analyzed for Ag, Al, Ba, Ca, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hg, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Ni, P, Pb, Rb, Sr, and Zn by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy and cold vapor atomic absorption spectroscopy. In terms of bioconcentration and bioexclusion concept, K, Ag, Cu, Rb, and P were highly bioconcentrated in caps, and their bioconcentration factor values varied for the 11 sites between 120 and 500-67-420, 70-220, 10-170, and 45-100, respectively. Cd, Zn, Mg, and Na showed bioconcentration factors (BCFs) between 3.3 and 36, 3.7-15, 0.92-6.3, and 1.4-44 while Al, Ba, Ca, Co, Cr, Mn, Ni, Pb, and Sr were excluded (BCF < 1). The Parasol Mushroom is a species harvested in the wild, and its caps are of unique taste and can contain a spectrum of essential and hazardous mineral compounds accumulated at elevated concentrations, even if collected at the background (pristine) areas. These elevated mineral concentrations of the caps are due to the efficient bioconcentration potential of the species (K, Ag, Cu, Rb, P, Cd, Zn, Mg, and Na) and abundance in the soil substrates (Al, Ca, Fe, Mn). The estimated intake rates of Cd, Hg, and Pb contained in Parasol Mushroom's caps show a cause for concern associated with these metals resulting from the consumption of between 300- and 500-g caps daily, on a frequent basis in the mushrooming season. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Philippines | 1 | 2% |
| Czechia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 54 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 17 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 27% |
| Environmental Science | 6 | 11% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 20 | 36% |
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 10 March 2013.
All research outputs
#7,943,894
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#1,749
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,479
of 122,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 122,134 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.