Cited by 21Microbial bioremediation and biosurfactantsWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalEnvironmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An improved effective microorganism (EM) soil ball-making method for water quality restoration

Park, Gun-Seok, Khan, Abdur Rahim, Kwak, Yunyoung, Hong, Sung-Jun, Jung, ByungKwon, Ullah, Ihsan, Kim, Jong-Guk, Shin, Jae-Ho·2016·Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Abstract

Soil balls containing the so-called effective microorganisms (EM) have been applied to improve water quality of small ponds, lakes, and streams worldwide. However, neither the physical conditions facilitating their proper application nor the diversity of microbial community in such soil balls have been investigated. In this study, the application of 0.75% of hardener to the soil balls exerted almost neutral pH (pH 7.3) which caused up to a fourfold increased hardness of the soil ball. Moreover, the 0.75% of hardener in the soil ball also improved the water quality due to a significant reduction in dissolved oxygen, total phosphorus, and total nitrogen contents. Metagenomic analysis of the microbial community in the soil ball with 0.75% hardener was compared with control (traditional soil ball) through next-generation sequencing. The traditional soil ball microbial community comprised 96.1% bacteria, 2.7% eukaryota, and 1% archaea, whereas the soil ball with 0.75% hardener comprised 71.4% bacteria, 27.9% eukaryota, and 0.2% viruses. Additionally, metagenomic profiles for both traditional and improved soil balls revealed that the various xenobiotic biodegradation, such as those for caprolactam, atrazine, xylene, toluene, styrene, bisphenol, and chlorocyclohexane might be responsible for organic waste cleanup.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11356-015-5617-x

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 34 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. NIAST (2000) Method of soil and plant analysis. National Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology (NIAST), Suwan
  2. Teruo H, James FP (1994) Beneficial and effective microorganisms for a sustainable agriculture and environment. International Nature Farming Research Centre, Nagano

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Park, G.-S., Khan, A. R., Kwak, Y., Hong, S.-J., Jung, B., Ullah, I., Kim, J.-G., & Shin, J.-H.
Affiliations
  • Kyungpook National University (KR)
  • The University of Agriculture, Peshawar (PK)
Corresponding author
Shin, Jae-Ho
Venue
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Published
2015-10-24
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
1100-1107
ISSN
  • 0944-1344 (ISSN-L)
  • 1614-7499
OpenAlex
W1831644796
Cited by
20
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Science and Pollution Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Environment
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microbial bioremediation and biosurfactants
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Wastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Environmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies
Keywords
effective microorganisms, water remediation, curing agents, microbial community composition, protists, xenobiotic degradation, organic waste degradation, dissolved oxygen
MeSH terms
Bacteria, Biodegradation, Environmental, Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Soil, Soil Microbiology, Metagenomics, Water Quality

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