Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 318

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fate of CuO and ZnO Nano- and Microparticles in the Plant Environment

Dimkpa, Christian O., Latta, Drew E., McLean, Joan E., Britt, David W., Boyanov, Maxim I., Anderson, Anne J.·2013·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

The environmental fate of metal oxide particles as a function of size was assessed by comparing the behavior of CuO or ZnO nanoparticles (NPs) to that of the corresponding microparticles (MPs) in a sand matrix, with and without wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) growth. After 14 days of incubation in the planted sand, the CuO and ZnO NPs were increased from their nominal sizes of <50 nm and <100 nm, to ~317 nm and ~483 nm, respectively. Accordingly, the negative surface charge of colloids present in aqueous extracts from the sand amended with CuO (-27.0 mV) and ZnO (-10.0 mV) NPs was reduced by the presence of plants, to -19.8 mV and -6.0 mV, respectively. The surface charge of the MPs was not influenced by plants. Plant growth increased dissolution of NPs and MPs of both metal oxides in the sand from <0.3 mg/kg to about 1.0 mg/kg for the CuO products, and from ≤0.6 mg/kg to between 1.0 and 2.2 mg/kg for the Zn products. The NP or MP products reduced wheat root length by ~60% or ~50% from control levels; CuO was more toxic than ZnO. X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) analysis showed that treatments with MPs or NPs of ZnO led to similar accumulations of Zn-phosphate species in the shoots, likely from dissolution of ZnO. Exposure to CuO NPs or MPs resulted in similar XAS spectra for Cu in the shoots explained by plant accumulation of both CuO and Cu(I)-sulfur complexes. These findings demonstrate the similarities between commercial NPs and MPs of CuO or ZnO in wheat plants, with greater root toxicity correlating with smaller particle size. Factors from the sand and the plant modified the aggregation or dissolution of both types of particles, thus, influencing their environmental fates.

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 · 10.1021/es304736y

Cites

2 of 2 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

Cited by

See all 318

Metadata

Authors
Dimkpa, C. O., Latta, D. E., McLean, J. E., Britt, D. W., Boyanov, M. I., & Anderson, A. J.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2013-04-08
Volume
47
Issue
9
Pages
4734-4742
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W2081740687
Cited by
318
References
2
FWCI
8.14
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: Fate of CuO and ZnO Nano- and Microparticles in the Plant Environment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es304736y
The paper
Dimkpa, C. O., Latta, D. E., McLean, J. E., Britt, D. W., Boyanov, M. I., & Anderson, A. J. (2013). Fate of CuO and ZnO Nano- and Microparticles in the Plant Environment. Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es304736y

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.