↓ Skip to main content

Effects of Glyphosate and 2,4-D on Earthworms (Eisenia foetida) in Laboratory Tests

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of Environmental Contamination & Toxicology, July 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#13 of 2,932)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
Title
Effects of Glyphosate and 2,4-D on Earthworms (Eisenia foetida) in Laboratory Tests
Published in
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination & Toxicology, July 2010
DOI 10.1007/s00128-010-0089-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

F. V. Correia, J. C. Moreira

Abstract

Laboratory tests were conducted to compare the effects of various concentrations of glyphosate and 2,4-D on earthworms (Eisenia foetida) cultured in Argissol during 56 days of incubation. The effects on earthworm growth, survival, and reproduction rates were verified for different exposure times. Earthworms kept in glyphosate-treated soil were classified as alive in all evaluations, but showed gradual and significant reduction in mean weight (50%) at all test concentrations. For 2,4-D, 100% mortality was observed in soil treated with 500 and 1,000 mg/kg. At 14 days, 30%-40% mortality levels were observed in all other concentrations. No cocoons or juveniles were found in soil treated with either herbicide. Glyphosate and 2,4-D demonstrated severe effects on the development and reproduction of Eisenia foetida in laboratory tests in the range of test concentrations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 3%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 76 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 18%
Unspecified 13 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Master 12 15%
Researcher 8 10%
Other 20 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 46%
Environmental Science 17 22%
Unspecified 16 20%
Chemistry 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 3 4%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 21 April 2019.
All research outputs
#707,583
of 13,253,522 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination & Toxicology
#13
of 2,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,783
of 292,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination & Toxicology
#1
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,253,522 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,932 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 292,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 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 98% of its contemporaries.