Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 649

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Estrogenic activity in five United Kingdom rivers detected by measurement of vitellogenesis in caged male trout

Harries, Jule E, Sheahan, David A, Jobling, Susan, Matthiessen, Peter, Neall, Paula, Sumpter, John P, Tylor, Tina, Zaman, Nicholas·1997·Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Abstract

It was recently demonstrated that most, if not all, effluents of sewage-treatment works (STWs) in the United Kingdom are estrogenic to fish. As many STWs discharge into rivers, it is possible that some stretches of rivers downstream of where the effluent enters might also be estrogenic. To assess this possibility, the induction of vitellogenin synthesis in caged male trout placed at various distances downstream of the effluent entry point was used as a biomarker of estrogen exposure. Individual discharges into five rivers in England were studied. In four cases, fish placed in the neat effluent, or close to where it entered a river, showed very marked and rapid increases in their plasma vitellogenin concentrations, demonstrating that the effluent was estrogenic. In two of these four cases, none of the downstream sites were estrogenic, whereas in one of the four, fish placed at a site 1.5 km downstream did respond by synthesizing appreciable amounts of vitellogenin, although sites further downstream were not estrogenic. The situation in the fourth river was quite different; not only was the effluent extremely estrogenic (a maximum vitellogenin response in the mg/ml range was attained), but so were all the other study sites on the river, the last of which was 5 km downstream of where the effluent entered. This particular river receives trade effluent from wool-scouring mills, which contains much higher concentrations of alkylphenolic chemicals than any of the other discharges studied. It is suggested that these chemicals probably account for the estrogenic activity of this river. The final (fifth) river showed no estrogenic activity, not even in the neat effluent. This discharge comes from a very small STW, which receives no trade waste, and one or both of these factors may account for why the effluent (and hence the river) was not estrogenic.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/etc.5620160320

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 31 references

Cited by

See all 649

Metadata

Authors
Harries, J. E., Sheahan, D. A., Jobling, S., Matthiessen, P., Neall, P., Sumpter, J. P., Tylor, T., & Zaman, N.
Venue
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
Published
1997-03-01
Volume
16
Issue
3
Pages
534-542
ISSN
  • 0730-7268 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8618
OpenAlex
W2099160355
Cited by
649
References
31
FWCI
33.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Estrogenic activity in five United Kingdom rivers detected by measurement of vitellogenesis in caged male trout. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/etc.5620160320
The paper
Harries, J. E., Sheahan, D. A., Jobling, S., Matthiessen, P., Neall, P., Sumpter, J. P., Tylor, T., & Zaman, N. (1997). Estrogenic activity in five United Kingdom rivers detected by measurement of vitellogenesis in caged male trout. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620160320

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.