The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 85 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Recycling sludge on cropland as fertilizer – Advantages and risks
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Background Digested sludge is a good source of plant nutrients. However, depending on the feedstock, it might contain heavy metals, metalloids, organic compounds, pathogens, and pharmaceuticals, which can cause adverse effects on crop growth and contaminate the groundwater, soil, and food chain. Scope The aim of this review is to focus on the potential risks of inorganic and organic contaminants to plant growth, soil, groundwater, and consequently the food chain and environment related to the utilization of digested sludge as a fertilizer on cropland. Conclusions Inorganic compounds, such as metals and metalloids, in sludge can occasionally cause reductions in soil microbial biomass. In general, the uptake of metals and organic contaminants does not appear to cause a significant hazard to the plants and the concentrations do not surpass the maximum values allowed in soil. Organic compounds, harmful for human health or the environment, are to a large extent decomposed or volatilized from the land treated with sludge, which decreases their leaching into the environment. Many of the organic compounds are lipophilic and can be bound to soil organic matter. In conclusion, the application of sludge on cropland might be a sustainable management practice; however, further investigations are needed to determine the accumulation and persistence of possible hazardous emerging chemicals and pathogens in the environment and formation of harmful intermediate reaction of inorganic and organic compound products.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Wastewater engineering: Treatment, disposal and reuse
(1980) · Advances in Water Resources · doi:10.1016/0309-1708(80)90067-6 · Cited by 5,123
Antibiotics in the aquatic environment – A review – Part I
Kümmerer, K. (2009) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.11.086 · Cited by 4,475
Global Distribution of Perfluorooctane Sulfonate in Wildlife
Giesy, J. P., & Kannan, K. (2001) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es001834k · Cited by 2,750
Wastewater Engineering Treatment Disposal Reuse
Tchobanoglous, G., & Burton, F. L. (1972) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,057
Advanced Oxidation Processes (AOPs) in Wastewater Treatment
Deng, Y., & Zhao, R. (2015) · Current Pollution Reports · doi:10.1007/s40726-015-0015-z · Cited by 1,930
Emerging organic contaminants in groundwater: A review of sources, fate and occurrence
Lapworth, D. J., Baran, N., Stuart, M. E., & Ward, R. S. (2012) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2011.12.034 · Cited by 1,895
Yang, Y., Ok, Y. S., Kim, K.-H., Kwon, E. E., & Tsang, Y. F. (2017) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.102 · Cited by 1,608
Utilization of sewage sludge in EU application of old and new methods—A review
Fytili, D., & Zabaniotou, A. (2008) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2006.05.014 · Cited by 1,457
Sorption of Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Soils: A Review
Tolls, J. (2001) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es0003021 · Cited by 1,388
Radjenović, J., Petrović, M., & Barceló, D. (2009) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2008.11.043 · Cited by 1,224
Cited by
Seleiman, M. F., Almutairi, K. F., Alotaibi, M., Shami, A., Alhammad, B. A., & Battaglia, M. L. (2020) · Plants · doi:10.3390/plants10010002 · Cited by 396
Self-citationNano-fertilizers: A sustainable technology for improving crop nutrition and food security
Jakhar, A. M., Aziz, I., Kaleri, A. R., Hasnain, M., Haider, G., Ma, J., & Abideen, Z. (2022) · NanoImpact · doi:10.1016/j.impact.2022.100411 · Cited by 281
Management Strategies to Mitigate N2O Emissions in Agriculture
Hassan, M. U., Aamer, M., Mahmood, A., Awan, M. I., Barbanti, L., Seleiman, M. F., Bakhsh, G., Alkharabsheh, H. M., Babur, E., Shao, J., et al. (2022) · Life · doi:10.3390/life12030439 · Cited by 199
Self-citationChen, Y.-G., He, X.-L.-S., Huang, J.-H., Luo, R., Ge, H.-Z., Wołowicz, A., Wawrzkiewicz, M., Gładysz-Płaska, A., Li, B., Yu, Q.-X., et al. (2021) · Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112336 · Cited by 192
Eraky, M., Elsayed, M., Qyyum, M. A., Ai, P., & Tawfik, A. (2022) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2022.113708 · Cited by 50
Metadata
- Authors
- Seleiman, M. F., Santanen, A., & Mäkelä, P. S. A.
- Venue
- Resources, Conservation and Recycling
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-04
- Volume
- 155
- Pages
- 104647
- ISSN
- 0921-3449 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2996603661
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 85
- FWCI
- 21.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Recycling sludge on cropland as fertilizer – Advantages and risks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104647
- The paper
- Seleiman, M. F., Santanen, A., & Mäkelä, P. S. A. (2020). Recycling sludge on cropland as fertilizer – Advantages and risks. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104647
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.
