↓ Skip to main content

The impact of onsite wastewater disposal systems on groundwater in areas inundated by Hurricane Sandy in New York and New Jersey

Overview of attention for article published in Marine Pollution Bulletin, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
The impact of onsite wastewater disposal systems on groundwater in areas inundated by Hurricane Sandy in New York and New Jersey
Published in
Marine Pollution Bulletin, June 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.04.038
Pubmed ID
Authors

Irene J. Fisher, Patrick J. Phillips, Kaitlyn M. Colella, Shawn C. Fisher, Tristen Tagliaferri, William T. Foreman, Edward T. Furlong

Abstract

Coastal onsite wastewater disposal systems (OWDS) were inundated by Hurricane Sandy's storm tide. This study compares the shallow groundwater quality (nutrients, pharmaceuticals, and hormones) downgradient of OWDS before and after Hurricane Sandy, where available, and establishes a baseline for wastewater influence on groundwater in coastal communities inundated by Hurricane Sandy. Nutrients and contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) were detected in shallow groundwater downgradient of OWDS in two settings along the New Jersey and New York coastlines: 1) a single, centralized OWDS in a park; and 2) multiple OWDS (cesspools) in low-density residential and mixed-use/medium density residential areas. The most frequently detected pharmaceuticals were lidocaine (40%), carbamazepine (36%), and fexofenadine, bupropion, desvenlafaxine, meprobamate, and tramadol (24-32%). Increases in the number and total concentration of pharmaceuticals after Hurricane Sandy may reflect other factors (seasonality, usage) besides inundation, and demonstrate the importance of analyzing for a wide variety of CECs in regional studies.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 21%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 6 18%
Chemistry 5 15%
Environmental Science 4 12%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 6 18%

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 11 July 2016.
All research outputs
#10,890,176
of 12,288,060 outputs
Outputs from Marine Pollution Bulletin
#2,925
of 4,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,126
of 266,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Marine Pollution Bulletin
#96
of 153 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,288,060 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 266,342 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 153 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.