Cited by 9Environmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyFire effects on ecosystemsPesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies

Investigation of the potential effects of firefighting water additives on soil invertebrates and terrestrial plants

Anderson, J., Prosser, R.S.·2023·Chemosphere

Abstract

The intensity and frequency of forest fires is increasing across the globe due to climate change. Additives are often added to make water more effective at extinguishing fire and preventing re-ignition. This study investigated the toxicity of nine different firefighting water additives to four species of soil invertebrates (Folsomia candida, Porcellio laevis, Porcellio scaber, and Trichorhina tomentosa) and two plant species (Agropyron cristatum and Raphanus sativus). Considerable variation in toxicity was observed among the firefighting products. The toxicity of individual products also varied considerably amongst the tested species. A hazard assessment was conducted by comparing the concentration of firefighting water additive that caused a 50% effect (LC50 or EC50) or a concentration that caused no effect (NOEC) to the concentration recommended by the manufacturer. At a rate of application representative of a forest firefighting scenario, most firefighting water additives tested in this study posed a hazard to F. candida and the three isopod species. The majority of products did not pose a risk to the two plant species included in this study. Consideration of the toxicity of firefighting water additives to terrestrial biota should be considered along with the efficacy of the product to fight fires when deciding which products to use.

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 · 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.137496

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Anderson, J., & Prosser, R. S.
Affiliations
University of Guelph (CA)
Corresponding author
Prosser, R.S.
Venue
Chemosphere
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-02
Volume
313
Pages
137496
ISSN
0045-6535 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4310885971
Cited by
9
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2
FWCI
0.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Chemosphere (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • NSERC
  • Mitacs
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies
Keywords
soil invertebrates, land plants, ecotoxicity, Folsomia candida, Porcellio laevis, Porcellio scaber, Agropyron cristatum, radish, hazard assessment, forest fires, Isopoda
MeSH terms
Animals, Arthropods, Fires, Invertebrates, Soil, Soil Pollutants, Isopoda

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