↓ Skip to main content

Use of honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) as bioindicators for assessment and source appointment of metal pollution

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science & Pollution Research, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
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.
Title
Use of honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) as bioindicators for assessment and source appointment of metal pollution
Published in
Environmental Science & Pollution Research, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11356-017-0196-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nenad M Zarić, Konstantin Ilijević, Ljubiša Stanisavljević, Ivan Gržetić

Abstract

The ability of honeybees to collect particulate matter (PM) on their bodies makes them outstanding bioindicators. In this study, two cities, Pančevo (PA) and Vršac (VS), South Banat district, Vojvodina, Serbia, were covered with two sampling sites each. The aims of this study were to determine concentrations of Al, Ba, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Na, Ni, Sr, and Zn in the bodies of honeybees during July and September of 2013, 2014, and 2015 and to analyze their spatial and temporal variations and sources of analyzed elements, as well as to assess pollution levels in the two cities. Significant temporal differences were found for Al, Ba, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Na, Ni, and Zn. Trend of reduction in metal concentrations in bodies of honeybees during the years was observed. Statistically significant spatial variations were observed for Al, Ba, and Sr, with higher concentrations in VS. PCA and CA analyses were used for the first time to assess sources of metals found in honeybees. These analyses showed two sources of metals. Co, Cd, Na, Fe, Mn, Zn, and partly Cu were contributed to anthropogenic sources, while Ca, Al, Mg, Cr, Ba, Sr, and Ni were contributed to natural sources.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 13%
Professor 3 13%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 6 25%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 33%
Environmental Science 5 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 13%
Unspecified 1 4%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 5 21%

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 23 September 2017.
All research outputs
#8,811,905
of 14,047,271 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Pollution Research
#1,365
of 4,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,682
of 273,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Pollution Research
#52
of 197 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,047,271 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,163 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 273,344 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 197 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 61% of its contemporaries.