<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<export-example>
  <doc>
    <id>9101</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2023</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>deu</language>
    <pageFirst/>
    <pageLast/>
    <pageNumber/>
    <edition/>
    <issue/>
    <volume>T1/2023</volume>
    <type>book</type>
    <publisherName>DWA / GDCh</publisherName>
    <publisherPlace/>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>0</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>--</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="deu">Handlungsempfehlung zur integrativen Bewertung der weitergehenden Abwasserbehandlung von kommunalen Kläranlagen</title>
    <abstract language="deu">Das vorliegende Statuspapier beschreibt ein Konzept zur weitergehenden Abwasserbehandlung für&#13;
die Bewertung von Aufbereitungsverfahren, sowohl in einer Pilotphase zur Auswahl von Verfah-&#13;
rensoptionen als auch für die Bewertung großtechnischer Anlagen.</abstract>
    <identifier type="isbn">978-3-96862-563-8</identifier>
    <enrichment key="Series">DWA-Themen</enrichment>
    <enrichment key="PeerReviewed">yes</enrichment>
    <enrichment key="opus.source">publish</enrichment>
    <author>Thomas Ternes</author>
    <submitter>Marcus Weber</submitter>
    <editor>Christian Wilhelm</editor>
    <author>Karl-Heinz Bauer</author>
    <author>Frank Brauer</author>
    <author>Jörg Drewes</author>
    <author>Adriano Joss</author>
    <author>Georg Hiller</author>
    <author>Kevin Jewell</author>
    <author>Jörg Oehlmann</author>
    <author>Michael Radke</author>
    <author>Ulrike Schulte-Oehlmann</author>
    <author>Thomas Schwartz</author>
    <author>Peter Seel</author>
    <author>Jeanette Völker</author>
    <author>Lilo Weber</author>
    <author>Marcus Weber</author>
    <collection role="persons" number="weber">Weber, Marcus</collection>
    <collection role="projects" number="MathPlusAA1-1">MathPlusAA1-1</collection>
    <collection role="institutes" number="MSoCP">Modeling and Simulation of Complex Processes</collection>
    <collection role="projects" number="MathPlusAA1-15">MathPlusAA1-15</collection>
  </doc>
  <doc>
    <id>7176</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2019</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>eng</language>
    <pageFirst>47</pageFirst>
    <pageLast>60</pageLast>
    <pageNumber/>
    <edition/>
    <issue/>
    <volume>152</volume>
    <type>article</type>
    <publisherName/>
    <publisherPlace/>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>0</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>--</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="eng">What you extract is what you see: Optimising the preparation of water and wastewater samples for in vitro bioassays</title>
    <abstract language="eng">The assessment of water quality is crucial for safeguarding drinking water resources and ecosystem integrity. To this end, sample preparation and extraction is critically important, especially when investigating emerging contaminants and the toxicity of water samples. As extraction methods are rarely optimised for bioassays but rather adopted from chemical analysis, this may result in a misrepresentation of the actual toxicity.&#13;
&#13;
In this study, surface water, groundwater, hospital and municipal wastewater were used to characterise the impacts of common sample preparation techniques (acidification, filtration and solid phase extraction (SPE)) on the outcomes of eleven in vitro bioassays. The latter covered endocrine activity (reporter gene assays for estrogen, androgen, aryl-hydrocarbon, retinoic acid, retinoid X, vitamin D, thyroid receptor), mutagenicity (Ames fluctuation test), genotoxicity (umu test) and cytotoxicity. Water samples extracted using different SPE sorbents (Oasis HLB, Supelco ENVI-Carb+, Telos C18/ENV) at acidic and neutral pH were compared for their performance in recovering biological effects.&#13;
&#13;
Acidification, commonly used for stabilisation, significantly altered the endocrine activity and toxicity of most (waste)water samples. Sample filtration did not affect the majority of endpoints but in certain cases affected the (anti-)estrogenic and dioxin-like activities. SPE extracts (10.4 × final concentration), including WWTP effluents, induced significant endocrine effects that were not detected in aqueous samples (0.63 × final concentration), such as estrogenic, (anti-)androgenic and dioxin-like activities. When ranking the SPE methods using multivariate Pareto optimisation an extraction with Telos C18/ENV at pH 7 was most effective in recovering toxicity. At the same time, these extracts were highly cytotoxic masking the endpoint under investigation. Compared to that, extraction at pH 2.5 enriched less cytotoxicity.&#13;
&#13;
In summary, our study demonstrates that sample preparation and extraction critically affect the outcome of bioassays when assessing the toxicity of water samples. Depending on the water matrix and the bioassay, these methods need to be optimised to accurately assess water quality.</abstract>
    <parentTitle language="eng">Water Research</parentTitle>
    <identifier type="doi">10.1016/j.watres.2018.12.049</identifier>
    <enrichment key="PeerReviewed">yes</enrichment>
    <author>Aennes Abbas</author>
    <submitter>Marcus Weber</submitter>
    <author>Ilona Schneider</author>
    <author>Anna Bollmann</author>
    <author>Jan Funke</author>
    <author>Jörg Oehlmann</author>
    <author>Carsten Prasse</author>
    <author>Ulrike Schulte-Oehlmann</author>
    <author>Wolfram Seitz</author>
    <author>Thomas Ternes</author>
    <author>Marcus Weber</author>
    <author>Henning Wesely</author>
    <author>Martin Wagner</author>
    <collection role="institutes" number="num">Numerical Mathematics</collection>
    <collection role="institutes" number="compmol">Computational Molecular Design</collection>
    <collection role="persons" number="weber">Weber, Marcus</collection>
    <collection role="projects" number="TransRisk">TransRisk</collection>
  </doc>
  <doc>
    <id>8925</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2023</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>deu</language>
    <pageFirst/>
    <pageLast/>
    <pageNumber/>
    <edition/>
    <issue/>
    <volume>T1/2023</volume>
    <type>incollection</type>
    <publisherName>DWA</publisherName>
    <publisherPlace/>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>0</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>--</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="deu">Handlungsempfehlung zur integrativen Bewertung der weitergehenden Abwasserbehandlung von kommunalen Kläranlagen</title>
    <abstract language="deu">Der DWA-Themenband beschreibt ein Konzept zur weitergehenden Abwasserbehandlung für die Bewertung von Aufbereitungsverfahren, sowohl in einer Pilotphase zur Auswahl von Verfahrensoptionen als auch für die Bewertung großtechnischer Anlagen. Emissionsseitig basiert das Konzept auf bereits regulatorisch definierten Parametern wie anorganischen Stickstoff-Verbindungen oder Phosphat sowie auf neuen noch nicht in der Abwasserverordnung regulierten Parametern. Die immissionsseitige Betrachtung erfolgt auf Basis der rechtlich durch die Europäische Wasserrahmenrichtlinie und andere Anforderungen bindenden Instrumente. Hierfür werden spezifische Vorgehensweisen vorgeschlagen. Anhand zweier ausgewählter Praxisbeispiele wird deutlich, dass es zur Bewertung der Verfahrensoptionen an einem Standort dienlich ist, ausgewählte Reduktionen bzw. Entfernungen von Stoffen, Organismen und Effekten zu bestimmen.</abstract>
    <parentTitle language="deu">DWA-Themen</parentTitle>
    <enrichment key="PeerReviewed">yes</enrichment>
    <enrichment key="opus.source">publish</enrichment>
    <author>Thomas Ternes</author>
    <submitter>Marcus Weber</submitter>
    <author>Karl-Heinz Bauer</author>
    <author>Frank Brauer</author>
    <author>Jürgen Drewes</author>
    <author>Kevin Jewell</author>
    <author>Adriano Joss</author>
    <author>Jörg Oehlmann</author>
    <author>Michael Radtke</author>
    <author>Ulrike Schulte-Oehlmann</author>
    <author>Thomas Schwartz</author>
    <author>Peter Seel</author>
    <author>Jeanette Völker</author>
    <author>Lilo Weber</author>
    <author>Marcus Weber</author>
    <collection role="institutes" number="compmol">Computational Molecular Design</collection>
    <collection role="persons" number="weber">Weber, Marcus</collection>
    <collection role="projects" number="BB3R">BB3R</collection>
    <collection role="institutes" number="MSoCP">Modeling and Simulation of Complex Processes</collection>
  </doc>
</export-example>
