↓ Skip to main content

A comparative study of inorganic elements in the blood of male and female Caspian pond turtles (Mauremys caspica) from the southern basin of the Caspian Sea

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
Title
A comparative study of inorganic elements in the blood of male and female Caspian pond turtles (Mauremys caspica) from the southern basin of the Caspian Sea
Published in
Environmental Science & Pollution Research, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11356-017-0067-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Milad Adel, Adriana A. Cortés-Gómez, Maryam Dadar, Hossein Riyahi, Marc Girondot

Abstract

Due to their bioaccumulation and biomagnification pathways, inorganic elements can accumulate in high-level aquatic organisms in the food web. Then, this species can be used to monitor the quality of the environment. Blood concentration of nine inorganic elements, including possible toxic metals (An, Cu, Mn, Se, As, Ni, Cd, Pb, and Hg), in 20 males and 20 females from eight different locations with high industry and agriculture activities in Iran were evaluated in this work. Additionally, size, sex, condition index, and locations were also included and analyzed. Among the essential elements, Zn and Se presented very high concentrations (56.14 ± 2.66 and 8.44 ± 0.77 μg/g ww, respectively) in all locations. Regarding possible toxic elements, Pb and Cd presented concerning concentrations as well (0.52 and 0.58 μg/g ww); this is especially true for Pb, an element found in very high concentrations in tissues of turtles from the same area in a previous study. The sex and the size of the individuals also had significant differences in concentration of Pb, Cd, As, and Hg.

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 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 1 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 13%
Student > Postgraduate 1 13%
Unknown 4 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 1 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 13%
Unknown 6 75%

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 20 September 2019.
All research outputs
#7,603,947
of 14,521,746 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Pollution Research
#968
of 4,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,797
of 273,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Pollution Research
#32
of 190 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,521,746 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,414 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 273,646 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 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 190 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.