| Title |
(Anti-)estrogenic and (anti-)androgenic effects in wastewater during advanced treatment: comparison of three in vitro bioassays
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-016-7165-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda Gehrmann, Helena Bielak, Maximilian Behr, Fabian Itzel, Sven Lyko, Anne Simon, Gotthard Kunze, Elke Dopp, Martin Wagner, Jochen Tuerk |
| Abstract |
Endocrine-disrupting chemicals are mainly discharged into the environment by wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) and are known to induce adverse effects in aquatic life. Advanced treatment with ozone successfully removes such organic micropollutants, but an increase of estrogenic effects after the ozonation of hospital wastewater was observed in previous studies. In order to investigate this effect, estrogenic and androgenic as well as anti-estrogenic and anti-androgenic activities were observed during treatment of hospital wastewater using three different effect-based reporter gene bioassays. Despite different matrix influences, sensitivities, and test-specific properties, all assays used obtained comparable results. Estrogenic and androgenic activities were mainly reduced during the biological treatment and further removed during ozonation and sand filtration, resulting in non-detectable agonistic activities in the final effluent. An increased estrogenic activity after ozonation could not be observed in this study. Antagonistic effects were removed in the biological treatment by up to 50 % without further reduction in the advanced treatment. Due to the presence of antagonistic substances within the wastewater, masking effects were probable. Therefore, this study showed the relevance of antagonistic activities at hospital WWTPs and illustrates the need for a better understanding about antagonistic effects. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 19 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 19 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Engineering | 5 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 22 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 13 February 2018.
All research outputs
#3,383,449
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#549
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,178
of 359,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#8
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 359,617 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.