Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics
Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
SCImago
Q1
WOS
Q2
Impact factor
2.5
SJR
1.563
CiteScore
23.2
Categories
Agronomy and Crop Science
Animal Science and Zoology
Ecology
Economics and Econometrics
Global and Planetary Change
Areas
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Economics, Econometrics and Finance
Environmental Science
Years of issue
1952-2025
journal names
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie
CAN J AGR ECON
Top-3 citing journals

Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics
(1961 citations)

Sustainability
(477 citations)

SSRN Electronic Journal
(313 citations)
Top-3 organizations

University of Guelph
(258 publications)

University of Alberta
(209 publications)

University of Saskatchewan
(201 publications)

University of Guelph
(29 publications)

University of Saskatchewan
(21 publications)

University of Alberta
(12 publications)
Most cited in 5 years
Found
Publications found: 885
Q3

An UPLC-MS/MS method for determination of karacoline in mice and its pharmacokinetics study
Huang W., Dong X., Lin R., Ma J.
AbstractIn this experiment, ultra-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) was employed to quantify karacoline in mouse plasma following both intravenous and oral administration, thereby elucidating the pharmacokinetic characteristics of karacoline in mice. The analytes were extracted from mouse plasma using acetonitrile for protein precipitation. Chromatographic separation was performed on an HSS T3 column via gradient elution, with the mobile phase consisting of methanol and 0.1% formic acid in water. Quantification of karacoline and the internal standard (IS) was achieved using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode. Six mice received an intravenous (i.v.) injection of karacoline at a dose of 1 mg kg−1, while another six mice were administered karacoline orally (p.o.) at a dose of 5 mg kg−1. The calibration curve for karacoline in mouse plasma ranged from 1 ng mL−1 to 2,500 ng mL−1. The intra-day precision was within 10.4%, and the inter-day precision was within 13.0%. Accuracy ranged from 89.1% to 107.5%, with recovery rates between 77.6% and 88.2%. Matrix effects were observed within the range of 77.6%–107.4%. This method successfully estimated the pharmacokinetics of karacoline, and its bioavailability was determined to be 27.2%, these are preliminary studies that require verification on a larger group of animals.
Q3

Ultra-fast eco-friendly UHPLC–MS/MS methodology for the quantification of ASP3026 in human liver microsomes: Evaluation of metabolic stability via in silico software and in vitro metabolic incubation
Attwa M.W., Abdelhameed A.S., Kadi A.A.
AbstractASP3026 is a recently formulated and highly selective inhibitor designed to target the ALK kinase. ASP3026 efficiently inhibited ALK kinase activity and demonstrated superior selectivity at a panel of Tyr-kinases compared to crizotinib. The target of this investigation was to establish a highly accurate, fast, green, and highly sensitive Ultra-high performance liquid chromatography- Tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) technique for assessing the concentration of ASP3026 in human liver microsomes (HLMs). In vitro incubation, the metabolic stability of ASP3026 in HLMs was evaluated using this known approach. The validation steps for the UHPLC-MS/MS analytical technique in the HLMs were performed along with the bio-analytical method validation guidelines settled by the US-FDA. To increase the ecological sustainability of the current UHPLC-MS/MS system, a lower flow rate of 0.3 mL min−1, a shorter elution duration of 1 min, and a reduced consumption of ACN have been implemented. A screening of the chemical structure of ASP3026 for hazardous alerts and metabolic lability was performed by the StarDrop package, that includes the DEREK and P450 modules. The analytical separation of ASP3026 and fenebrutinib (FNB) on the reversed phase Eclipse Plus C18 column was performed using an isocratic mobile phase approach. The calibration curve produced by the ASP3026 showed a linear association over the level range of 1–3,000 ng mL−1. A study was conducted to evaluate the precision and accuracy of UHPLC-MS/MS technology in evaluating both intra-day and inter-day variations. The accuracy exhibited a range of −1.56%–7.33% across various days, and a range of −0.78%–10.66% within the same day. The ASP3026 underwent in vitro half-life and intrinsic clearance measurements, yielding values of 14.32 min and 56.62 mL min−1 kg−1, correspondingly. According to in silico software research, using minor modifications to the piperazine component or substituting the group in drug design has the potential to improve the metabolic safety and stability of novel derivatives in comparison to ASP3026.
Q3

Application of a multivariate optimization strategy to validate an RP-HPLC analytical method for determining hydroxychloroquine sulphate in pharmaceutical products and in forced degradation studies
Toti M.C., Bonfilio R., de Araújo M.B.
AbstractIn this study, a multivariate optimization strategy was used to develop and validate a simple, rapid, accurate, cost-effective, and stability-indicative RP-HPLC analytical method for quantifying hydroxychloroquine sulphate (HCQ) in coated tablets. The validation conditions involved isocratic elution mode, using a mixture of buffer solution at pH 2.2 and methanol (74:26, v/v) as the mobile phase, an Agilent® reverse phase column, model Zorbax Eclipse Plus C18 (250 cm × 4.6 mm × 5 μm), a flow rate of 1.3 mL min−1, column temperature 40 °C and detection at 343 nm. The method showed linearity in the range of 4–44 μg mL−1, with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.9998. Recovery obtained average values of between 99.71 and 100.84% and precision with average RSD values of <2%. The robustness demonstrated by assessing the effect of seven variables (pH of the mobile phase buffer; percentage of methanol; filter brand; mobile phase flow rate; wavelength; column temperature and sample agitation time), with effect values for each variable lower than the calculated value of s√2 (1.43), showed that none of these factors had a significant influence on the analytical response. The method was applied to samples of the reference medicine Plaquinol® 400 mg and similar Reuquinol 400 mg, nomenclature established by the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa), law no. 978 of 10 February 1999, purchased from local pharmacies. Results showed advantages and benefits in relation to the official method and those reported in the literature. The application of the multivariate strategy, the choice of methanol, in a lower proportion in the organic phase, due to its low toxicity, economy and easier availability compared to acetonitrile, and the other organic solvents used was a promising and important alternative for the analytical method. Furthermore, the use of reversed stationary phase, common in quality control laboratories, provided an analyte retention time of 4.595 min, demonstrating good performance and speed in routine analyses.
Q3

A vortex-assisted liquid-liquid extraction followed by dispersive-solid phase extraction (VA-LLE/d-SPE) for the determination of eight benzoylphenylureas insecticides in tomatoes and cucumbers
Alhamami M.A., Algethami J.S., Ramadan M.F., Abdallah O.I.
AbstractMonitoring benzoylphenylureas (BPUs) residues in ready-to-eat vegetables is of great interest for an adequate assessment of human pesticide exposure. A rapid, inexpensive, simple, and effective method for determining 8 BPUs insecticides in tomatoes and cucumbers was developed and validated. Vortex-assisted liquid-liquid extraction (VA-LLE) followed by dispersive solid-phase extraction (d-SPE) using graphitized carbon black (GCB) for cleanup was used before LC-MS/MS analysis. Different parameters were optimized, including the type and volume of extractants, vortex time, and the type and amount of adsorbents used for cleanup. The evaluation showed that the method has excellent linearity (R2 ≥ 0.994). The recovered 8 BPUs insecticides from spiked tomato and cucumber samples at 0.01, 0.05, and 0.25 mg kg−1 ranged from 83.2 to 105.2%, with RSD of 4.9–14.6%. The limits of quantitation (LOQs) were 0.0025 mg kg−1 (0.005 mg kg−1 for lufenuron). Within-day repeatability ranged from 3.9 to 13.9%, while between-day repeatability ranged from 8.9% to 17.7%. The optimized method was used to analyze 100 samples of tomatoes and cucumbers marketed in Saudi Arabia.
Q3

Headspace – Solid phase microextraction vs liquid injection GC-MS analysis of essential oils: Prediction of linear retention indices by multiple linear regression
Hristozova A., Batmazyan M., Simitchiev K., Tsoneva S., Kmetov V., Rosenberg E.
AbstractDue to the relative independence from the operational parameters, the linear retention indices (LRIs) are useful tool in gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) qualitative analysis. The aim of the current study was to develop a multiple linear regression (MLR) model for the prediction of LRIs as a function of selected molecular descriptors. Liquid injection GC-MS was used for the analysis of Essential oils (Rose, Lavender and Peppermint) separating the ingredients by a semi-standard non-polar stationary phase. As a result, a sum of 103 compounds were identified and their experimental LRIs were derived relying on reference measurements of a standard mixture of n-alkanes (from C8 to C20). As a next step, a set of molecular descriptors was generated for the distinguished chemical structures. Further, a stepwise MLR was applied for the selection of the significant descriptors (variables) which can be used to predict the LRIs. From an exploit set of over 2000 molecular descriptors, it was found that only 16 can be regarded as significant and independent variables. At this point split validation was applied: the identified compounds were randomly divided into training (85%) and validation (15%) sets. The training set (87 compounds) was used to derive two MLR models by applying i) the ‘enter’ algorithm (R2 = 0.9960, RMSЕ = 17) and ii) the ‘stepwise’ one (R2 = 0.9958, RMSЕ = 17). The predictive power was assessed by the validation set (16 compounds) as follows i) q2F1 = 0.9896, RMSE = 25 and ii) q2F1 = 0.9886, RMSE = 26, respectively. The adequateness of both regression approaches was further evaluated. Newly developed headspace-solid phase microextraction (HS-SPME) procedures in combination with GC-MS were used for an alternative analysis of the studied Essential oils. Twelve additional compounds, not previously detected by the liquid sample introduction mode of analysis, were identified for which the values of the significant descriptors were within the working range of the developed MLRs. For the last compounds, the LRIs were calculated and the experimental data was used as an external set for assessment of the regression models. The predictive power for both regression approaches was assessed as follows: Enter RMSE = 41, q2F2 = 0.9503 and Stepwise RMSE = 40, q2F2 = 0.9521.
Q3

Development and validation of an analytical method for acetamiprid determination in plant protection products using HPLC-DAD
Marczewska P., Rolnik J., Stobiecki T., Sajewicz M.
AbstractPlant protection products (PPP), crucial for agricultural production, are experiencing increased global demand, particularly with the growing need for food production. To meet this demand, robust analytical methods are essential for confirming the presence and determining active substance concentrations in PPP. This study introduces an analytical method utilizing high-performance liquid chromatography with a diode array detector (HPLC-DAD) for determination of acetamiprid in water-soluble powder formulations. The method, validated according to SANCO/3030/99 rev.5, demonstrated exhibited adequate accuracy and precision, with repeatability expressed as the ratio of the standard deviation (% RSD) to the relative standard deviation (% RSDr) being lower than 1. Recoveries for the active substance at concentrations above 10% ranged from 97% to 103%. The developed method is also characterized by suitable linearity, confirmed by a correlation coefficient >0.99. Specific chromatographic profiles were generated, and acetamiprid content in 180 formulations was analyzed, including reference products. The developed method aligns with “green chemistry” principles, minimizing solvent use and emphasizing energy efficiency. Overall, it offers a comprehensive approach for qualitative and quantitative analysis, ensuring the reliability of PPP quality control.
Q3

Analytical and numerical solutions of linear and nonlinear chromatography column models
Kaczmarski K., Szukiewicz M.K.
AbstractThe advection-convection models (ACM) have practical applications in the investigation of separation processes, where mass (heat) is transferred by convection and diffusion (dispersion) along mass/heat exchanger, eq. adsorption, chromatography column, tubular reactor, etc. The ACM consists of nonlinear partial differential equations which can be solved only with numerical methods. In the article, a comparison of the volume method (VM) and orthogonal collocation on finite elements (OCFE) is presented in terms of their reliability, accuracy of calculations, and speed of calculation. The OCFE proved to be more robust than VM.The linear ACM model for the chromatography column has an analytical solution in the form of the equation for the number of theoretical plates (N). This equation is often applied in the interpretation and evaluation of model parameters. However, the versions of N equation published in the literature are not correct. The error can lead to significant imprecision for specific cases. Here, in the paper, the revised equations are presented and discussed for the most frequently used chromatography column models.
Q3

Methodology for high-performance liquid chromatography detection of latanoprost and latanoprost free acid
Jankowski A.M., Vardar C., Talarico M.V., Wuchte L., Byrne M.E.
AbstractA gradient high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method has been developed to determine the concentrations of latanoprost (LP) and latanoprost free acid (LPA) in aqueous solutions. It is novel due to a combination of its simplicity, speed, and detection capability in aqueous solutions for both active drug (LPA) and prodrug (LP). This method is applicable for the research and development of novel drug delivery devices and quality control assays for experimental and commercial laboratory settings, as it allows for a high sample throughput. Samples were chromatographed across a C18 + 2.7 µm 4.6 × 7.5 mm reversed-phase column with gradient elution using a mobile phase of aqueous acetic acid (pH 3.1) and acetonitrile with 0.1% acetic acid. UV spectrophotometry was used to monitor the eluents at 210 nm. Drug concentrations from 1.0 to 150 μg mL−1 were tested, with good linearity observed across the range. LPA had a signature peak at approximately 4.82 min (SD < 0.08) and LP at 9.27 min (SD < 0.07). For both drug and pro-drug, LOD and LOQ were 1.0 and 2.5 μg mL−1, respectively. This assay which accurately measures both prodrug and drug in a single injection, has significant applicability in determining the release kinetics of novel LP drug delivery systems.
Q3

Identification and structural characterization of potential degradation products of baricitinib using liquid chromatography combined with quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry
Kakouri E., Gkountanas K., Kanakis C., Tarantilis P.A., Dotsikas Y.
AbstractBaricitinib (BRT) is a drug substance with potent anti-inflammatory activity indicated in rheumatoid arthritis, atopic dermatitis, severe alopecia areata and recently for the treatment of Covid-19. Process impurities of the drug during its formulation are quite known, however studies regarding its degradation products (DPs) under stress conditions are limited. In this study, the drug was subjected to forced degradation under various degradation conditions, including acidic hydrolysis, alkaline hydrolysis, oxidative and thermal, to determine its inherent stability. To this purpose, a novel HPLC method was developed for the determination of degradation impurities of BRT. Alkaline hydrolysis test showed a selectivity towards breaking C–C bonds. This resulted to five DPs formed by chain scission reactions occurred at the pyrrolo-pyrimidine group between C6–C10 and C8–C9. Also, the ethylsulfonyl-azetidin-ylidene group was subjected to C–C bond cleavage at C12–C15 and C16–C18. Degradation products were further characterized with the use of liquid chromatography quadrupole time of flight tandem mass spectrometry (LC-Q-TOF-MS/MS).
Q3

Development and validation of a quantitative minilab system for quality evaluation of selected medicines: Albendazole, arthemether-lumefantrine combination (Co-artem®), and mebendazole finished pharmaceutical products
Hasen G., Birhane W., Suleman S., Ashenef A.
AbstractThe current technologies for substandard and counterfeit drug detection are either too expensive for low-resource settings or only provide qualitative or semi-quantitative results. GPHF minilab™ is one of them based on thin layer chromatography(TLC) principles with a semi-quantitative capability by visual observation of the spot area and intensity for medicine quality analysis. Thus, its use as a quality control tool for pharmaceutical products has limitations as spot area and intensity visual observation by the naked eye highly varies from analyst to analyst. As such, in this study, the semi-quantitative technique has been transferred to a quantitative approach by capturing the developed TLC plate image using an Android-based mobile phone inside a simple carton box. Then, the spot area was quantified using justTLC software. The quantitative results were compared with the-high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method as the golden standard. Accordingly, linearity was observed in the assayed range (80–120% label claim), and the correlation coefficients found were (R2 = 0.958, 0.997, 0.941, and 0.956 for Albendazole, Mebendazole, Artemether, and Lumefantrine, respectively.). The values are satisfactory. The %RSDs found were less than 2% for all drugs [intraday (n = 6) (RSD = 1.17, 1.61, 1.87, and 1.64), and interday (n = 18) (RSD = 1.16, 0.72, 1.12, and 1.18) for Artemether, Lumefantrine, Mebendazole, and Albendazole, respectively]. Moreover, comparisons of results obtained from the sophisticated CAMAG UV cabinet (R2 =0.991, 0.971, 0.946, and 0.967) and the developed simple carton box (R2 = 0.958, 0.997, 0.941, and 0.956) for Albendazole, Mebendazole, Artemether, and Lumefantrine, respectively. The values are comparable and reveal the accuracy of the method. Robustness testings' that were performed under different altered conditions revealed the robustness of the method (RSD less than 2% for all factors). Additionally the deviations from the golden HPLC results were on average −8.62% for albendazole, −3.79% for artemether, and −4.52% for lumefantrine samples. The developed method shows a satisfactory performance capability to utilize the GPHF minilab™ as a quantitative technique for medicine quality control purposes. It will be a very useful tool in a resource-limited setting. The target method profile, which encompasses a simple, low-cost, linear, precise, robust, accurate, and quantitative GPHF minilab™ system, was obtained for Albendazole, Mebendazole, and Arthemeter lumefantine combinations (Co-artem). The proposed method was successfully applied to analyze the content of the marketed medicines in the above mentioned tablets and offered acceptable deviations from the golden HPLC method. Automation of quantitative GPHF minilab™ was highly recommended to enhance the appropriateness and use of this system.
Q3

Validation of HPLC-DAD method for analysis of paracetamol and potassium sorbate in liquid oral formulations and its application to forced degradation study
Mikulić M., Sazdanić D., Kladar N., Radulović J., Srđenović Čonić B., Atanacković Krstonošić M.
AbstractDue to the frequent use of paracetamol formulations, it is useful to develop an analytical technique for the determination of intact paracetamol in presence of other drugs and excipients or the degradation products. In this study, a simple, isocratic, fast, specific, accurate and precise stability-indicating high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method has been developed and validated for simultaneous quantitative determination of paracetamol (PCM) and potassium sorbate (PS) in oral liquid formulations. The chromatographic separation was achieved on Zorbax SB C18 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 5 µm) with Zorbax SB C18 precolumn (12.5 × 4.6 mm, 5 µm) using distilled water pH 2 with ortho-phosphoric acid and acetonitrile (70:30, v/v) as a mobile phase, and UV detection at 235 nm. The temperature of the column was kept constant at 25 °C. The method was validated according to International Conference on harmonization (ICH) guidelines. The method demonstrated excellent linearity, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9996 and 0.9998 for PCM and PS, respectively, over the concentration ranges of 10–600 μg mL−1 (PCM) and 6–500 μg mL−1 (PS). The retention time was found to be 1.98 and 4.86 min for PCM and PS, respectively. Oral liquid formulation samples were subjected to various stress conditions (acidic and alkaline hydrolysis, as well as oxidative, heat and photolytic degradation) for the purpose of forced degradation study. The major degradation of paracetamol was achieved in acidic and basic stress conditions, while thermal and photolytic degradation generally had the least influence. On the other hand, potassium sorbate was highly susceptible to photolytic degradation. It was also shown that the formulation has strong influence on stability of tested compounds. Forced degradation studies demonstrated the stability-indicating power of the method and can be used to assess the stability of paracetamol and potassium sorbate in oral liquid formulations.
Q3

A simple, rapid, and green method for determination of three cholic acids in bio-transformed Jindanfen by HPLC-MS
Qian Z., Huang Q., Wang F., Lei Q., He Z., Wu Q., Wu M., Gao J.
AbstractA simple, rapid, and green high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS) method was developed for determination of tauroursodeoxycholic acid (TUDCA), taurocholic acid (TCA), and taurochenodeoxycholic acid (TCDCA) in bio-transformed Jindanfen (BTJDF), which is obtained from chicken bile through a bioconversion process. The sample was prepared using water. The HPLC separation was operated on a poroshell 120 EC-C18 column with a 2.0 min gradient elution procedure. Detection was performed on a single quadrupole mass spectrometer in negative mode with selected ion monitoring mode (SIM). This developed HPLC-MS method presented good linearity (r > 0.997) and sensitivity (limit of quantification, 30.0–80.0 pg) for three analytes. The relative standard deviations (RSDs) for precision, repeatability, and stability were all below 3.00%. The matrix effects and average recoveries of three analytes were 91.2–97.9% (RSDs < 1.50%) and 95.4–103% (RSDs < 3.00%), respectively. The average contents of TUDCA, TCA, and TCDCA in ten batches of samples were 33.8, 13.2, and 20.5%, respectively. Finally, the greenness of the developed method was validated by Analytical Eco-Scale and Complex-GAPI. The developed method was proved to be an eco-friendly, effective, and reliable approach for assaying the three cholic acids in BTJDF, which is help to improve the quality evaluation level of the BTJDF industry.
Q3

Development of an HPLC-UV method for the simultaneous determination of allantoin and D-panthenol in cosmetic products containing Aloe vera extracts
Ceylan B., Kepekci Tekkeli S.E.
AbstractA simple, fast and selective analytical method has been developed for the simultaneous determination of allantoin and D-panthenol in cosmetic products containing Aloe vera extracts. The proposed method depends on reversed-phase liquid chromatography with isocratic flow profile of the mobile phase composed of acetonitrile–10 mM phosphoric acid (pH 2.5) (85:15, v/v), with a C18 column at 30 °C. The analytes were detected with UV–vis. detector at 210 nm. The injection volume was 20 μL. The linearity ranges were found to be 0.2–20 and 0.1–10 μg mL−1 for allantoin and D-panthenol, respectively. LOD values were found to be 0.07 μg mL−1 and 0.03 μg mL−1, LOQ values were found to be 0.2 and 0.1 μg mL−1 for allantoin and D-panthenol, respectively. No interference was observed from concomitants. The developed method was applied to the analysis of 10 different type cosmetic products. It is foreseen that the method will be able to be used in order to carry out routine analysis, quality control and standardization in cosmetic products containing allantoin and D-panthenol.
Q3

DoE-empowered development and validation of an environmentally sustainable RP-HPLC method for simultaneous estimation of antihypertensive drugs: AQbD perspective
Gopalaiah S.B., Jayaseelan K.
AbstractThe primary objective of the present inquiry is to formulate a sustainable method employing Reverse Phase-High Performance Liquid Chromatography (RP-HPLC) for determination of Amlodipine (AM) and Irbesartan (IRB) simultaneously, compounds commonly prescribed for hypertension treatment. Existing literature underscores the absence of a comprehensive method in this regard. This research endeavors to align with the tenets of green chemistry by seamlessly integrating Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD) with RP-HPLC, replacing environmentally hazardous chemical modifiers with eco-friendly solvents. Identifying the critical variables as the 70% ethanol level and flow rate, a central composite design is applied for optimization. The separation is achieved utilizing a Phenomenex Luna column (C18, 250 mm × 4.6 mm i.d, 5 μm) with a mobile phase comprising ethanol and 0.1 % o-phosphoric acid in a 70:30 v/v ratio, flowing at 0.8 mL min−1, and detection wavelength of 242 nm. Green assessment methodologies are implemented to gauge the adherence of the proposed RP-HPLC method to eco-friendly principles while ensuring efficiency in chromatographic performance. The current developed method is rapid with retention time of 2.3 and 3.3 min for AM and IRB respectively and having a wide linear range from 55 to 130 μg mL−1, which makes the suitable for the accurate quantification of AM and IRB simultaneously in bulk and tablet dosage form, there by minimize environmental impact by providing a conscientious choice for the routine analysis which is achieved through the amalgamation of AQbD with a sustainable approach.
Q3

The effect of different washing methods assisted by ultrasound on the removal of cypermethrin and spirotetramat residues in apples
Suyabatmaz A.M., Yakar Y.
AbstractThe simplest way to remove pesticide residues from fruits and vegetables is to wash them with tap water. However, this method is not effective enough. In this study, the effectiveness of different washing methods assisted by ultrasound on pesticide removal was investigated. For this purpose firstly, apples were soaked in a cypermethrin (CYP) and spirotetramat (SPI) solution, which are frequently used as insecticides. Subsequently, the apples were washed in solutions prepared with vinegar, lemon juice, and baking soda at different concentrations (0.5%, 1% and 2%) and assisted by ultrasound (2.5–5 min). The residues in the medicated and washed samples were analysed on an LC-MS/MS instrument after extraction using the QuEChERS extraction method. The results of the analysis showed that acidic vinegar and lemon juice were more effective than baking soda. Moreover, the application of ultrasound significantly increased this effect. When a 0.5% vinegar solution was assisted by ultrasound, 62% of the cypermethrin residue was removed and 82% of the spirotetramat residue was removed. These values were 51.5% and 49.6% higher than tap water, respectively. In conclusion, acidic solutions such as vinegar, which we can easily prepare at home, are highly effective in removing pesticide residues when assisted by ultrasound.
Top-100
Citing journals
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
|
|
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics
1961 citations, 11.75%
|
|
Sustainability
477 citations, 2.86%
|
|
SSRN Electronic Journal
313 citations, 1.88%
|
|
Agribusiness
310 citations, 1.86%
|
|
Agricultural Economics (United Kingdom)
298 citations, 1.79%
|
|
American Journal of Agricultural Economics
274 citations, 1.64%
|
|
Journal of Agricultural & Applied Economics
264 citations, 1.58%
|
|
Journal of Agricultural Economics
233 citations, 1.4%
|
|
Food Policy
211 citations, 1.26%
|
|
Agricultural Systems
199 citations, 1.19%
|
|
Applied Economics
190 citations, 1.14%
|
|
Ecological Economics
182 citations, 1.09%
|
|
British Food Journal
182 citations, 1.09%
|
|
European Review of Agricultural Economics
127 citations, 0.76%
|
|
Land Use Policy
119 citations, 0.71%
|
|
Food Quality and Preference
114 citations, 0.68%
|
|
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review
113 citations, 0.68%
|
|
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics
113 citations, 0.68%
|
|
Foods
112 citations, 0.67%
|
|
Agriculture (Switzerland)
105 citations, 0.63%
|
|
China Agricultural Economic Review
103 citations, 0.62%
|
|
Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy
97 citations, 0.58%
|
|
Journal of Cleaner Production
94 citations, 0.56%
|
|
Forest Policy and Economics
92 citations, 0.55%
|
|
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
90 citations, 0.54%
|
|
Agricultural Finance Review
89 citations, 0.53%
|
|
PLoS ONE
88 citations, 0.53%
|
|
Food Control
85 citations, 0.51%
|
|
Environmental and Resource Economics
84 citations, 0.5%
|
|
Journal of Environmental Management
84 citations, 0.5%
|
|
Aquaculture, Economics and Management
71 citations, 0.43%
|
|
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems
67 citations, 0.4%
|
|
Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Marketing
65 citations, 0.39%
|
|
Appetite
63 citations, 0.38%
|
|
Agrekon
58 citations, 0.35%
|
|
Journal of Food Products Marketing
56 citations, 0.34%
|
|
Journal of Rural Studies
54 citations, 0.32%
|
|
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
54 citations, 0.32%
|
|
Annual Review of Resource Economics
48 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
48 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Journal of Dairy Science
46 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Handbook of Agricultural Economics
45 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies
43 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Agricultural Economics (Czech Republic)
43 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Journal of Integrative Agriculture
43 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Heliyon
42 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Energy Economics
41 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Canadian Journal of Economics
40 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Land
39 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Science of the Total Environment
38 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Canadian Journal of Forest Research
38 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Marine Policy
38 citations, 0.23%
|
|
International Journal of Consumer Studies
37 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Marine Resource Economics
37 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Journal of Productivity Analysis
36 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Operations Management Research
36 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Review of Agricultural Economics
36 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Nutrients
35 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Ecosystem Services
33 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Agronomy
32 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Agricultural Water Management
30 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Agricultural and Food Economics
30 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Canadian Water Resources Journal
30 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Energy Policy
30 citations, 0.18%
|
|
International Journal of Logistics Management
30 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Environment, Development and Sustainability
30 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Meat Science
30 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Journal of Forest Economics
29 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment
28 citations, 0.17%
|
|
China Economic Review
28 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Environmental Management
28 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Empirical Economics
27 citations, 0.16%
|
|
International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications
27 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Technological Forecasting and Social Change
26 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Food Security
26 citations, 0.16%
|
|
World Development
26 citations, 0.16%
|
|
European Journal of Operational Research
25 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Trends in Food Science and Technology
25 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Environmental Science and Policy
25 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Animals
25 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Canadian Public Policy/ Analyse de Politiques
25 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Agronomy Journal
25 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Journal of Business Research
24 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Socio-Economic Planning Sciences
24 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Forests
24 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Journal of Co-operative Organization and Management
23 citations, 0.14%
|
|
International Food and Agribusiness Management Review
22 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture
22 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Agriculture and Food Security
22 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Preventive Veterinary Medicine
22 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Economic Analysis and Policy
22 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Environmental Modelling and Software
22 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja
22 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Agriculture and Human Values
22 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Energies
22 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Climatic Change
22 citations, 0.13%
|
|
IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
21 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Aquaculture
21 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Economic Modelling
20 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Journal of Futures Markets
20 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
|
Citing publishers
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
|
|
Wiley
3884 citations, 23.28%
|
|
Elsevier
3567 citations, 21.38%
|
|
Springer Nature
1484 citations, 8.9%
|
|
Taylor & Francis
1269 citations, 7.61%
|
|
MDPI
1222 citations, 7.32%
|
|
Emerald
812 citations, 4.87%
|
|
Oxford University Press
660 citations, 3.96%
|
|
Cambridge University Press
519 citations, 3.11%
|
|
Social Science Electronic Publishing
308 citations, 1.85%
|
|
Frontiers Media S.A.
227 citations, 1.36%
|
|
SAGE
156 citations, 0.94%
|
|
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
100 citations, 0.6%
|
|
Canadian Science Publishing
88 citations, 0.53%
|
|
IGI Global
81 citations, 0.49%
|
|
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
78 citations, 0.47%
|
|
Walter de Gruyter
71 citations, 0.43%
|
|
Annual Reviews
58 citations, 0.35%
|
|
University of Chicago Press
56 citations, 0.34%
|
|
IOP Publishing
54 citations, 0.32%
|
|
Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences
46 citations, 0.28%
|
|
38 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Hindawi Limited
33 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Now Publishers
31 citations, 0.19%
|
|
University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress)
31 citations, 0.19%
|
|
EDP Sciences
30 citations, 0.18%
|
|
American Society for Horticultural Science
29 citations, 0.17%
|
|
International Food and Agribusiness Management Association
26 citations, 0.16%
|
|
World Scientific
23 citations, 0.14%
|
|
CAIRN
23 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Wageningen Academic Publishers
20 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural
18 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
18 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Academic Journals
18 citations, 0.11%
|
|
CSIRO Publishing
18 citations, 0.11%
|
|
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
18 citations, 0.11%
|
|
SciELO
17 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Instituto Nacional de Investigacion y Tecnologia Agraria y Alimentaria
16 citations, 0.1%
|
|
PERSEE Program
16 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Scientific Research Publishing
16 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Science Alert
14 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Universitat Politecnica de Valencia
13 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Consortium Erudit
13 citations, 0.08%
|
|
IntechOpen
13 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Lyson Center for Civic Agriculture and Food Systems
12 citations, 0.07%
|
|
American Chemical Society (ACS)
11 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)
11 citations, 0.07%
|
|
American Institute of Mathematical Sciences (AIMS)
11 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Index Copernicus
10 citations, 0.06%
|
|
International Society for Horticultural Science (ISHS)
10 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Copernicus
10 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Centre for Evaluation in Education and Science (CEON/CEES)
10 citations, 0.06%
|
|
AIP Publishing
9 citations, 0.05%
|
|
MIT Press
9 citations, 0.05%
|
|
LLC CPC Business Perspectives
9 citations, 0.05%
|
|
OpenEdition
9 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Research Square Platform LLC
9 citations, 0.05%
|
|
8 citations, 0.05%
|
|
American Society of Animal Science
8 citations, 0.05%
|
|
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Crop Science Society of America
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
IWA Publishing
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
AKI Agrárközgazdasági Intézet Nonprofit Kft
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
The Food System Research Association of Japan
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Asian Network for Scientific Information
6 citations, 0.04%
|
|
6 citations, 0.04%
|
|
PeerJ
6 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Sociedade Brasileira de Ciencia e Tecnologia de Alimentos
6 citations, 0.04%
|
|
International Research and Training Center on Erosion and Sedimentation and China Water and Power Press
6 citations, 0.04%
|
|
AOSIS
6 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Canadian Institute of Forestry
6 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
University of California Press
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
The Royal Society
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
American Economic Association
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
National Recreation and Park Association
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Virtus Interpress
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Cognizant, LLC
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
F1000 Research
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Hans Publishers
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
The Agricultural Economics Society of Japan
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
King Saud University
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Mary Ann Liebert
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Scientific Publishers
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Peeters Publishers
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Vilnius Gediminas Technical University
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Bureau for Economic Research
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Japan Society of Civil Engineers
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
BMJ
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
JMIR Publications
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
South Florida Publishing LLC
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS)
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Pamukkale Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi
4 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Trans Tech Publications
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Brill
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
HACCP Consulting
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
|
Publishing organizations
50
100
150
200
250
300
|
|
University of Guelph
258 publications, 9.24%
|
|
University of Alberta
209 publications, 7.49%
|
|
University of Saskatchewan
201 publications, 7.2%
|
|
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
149 publications, 5.34%
|
|
University of Manitoba
132 publications, 4.73%
|
|
Université Laval
75 publications, 2.69%
|
|
Iowa State University
64 publications, 2.29%
|
|
Purdue University
49 publications, 1.76%
|
|
University of British Columbia
48 publications, 1.72%
|
|
University of Lethbridge
46 publications, 1.65%
|
|
McGill University
34 publications, 1.22%
|
|
University of California, Davis
33 publications, 1.18%
|
|
University of Calgary
32 publications, 1.15%
|
|
Cornell University
25 publications, 0.9%
|
|
North Dakota State University
24 publications, 0.86%
|
|
University of Florida
24 publications, 0.86%
|
|
Michigan State University
23 publications, 0.82%
|
|
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
23 publications, 0.82%
|
|
University of Wisconsin–Madison
23 publications, 0.82%
|
|
Arizona State University
21 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Texas A&M University
19 publications, 0.68%
|
|
University of Minnesota
16 publications, 0.57%
|
|
Kansas State University
16 publications, 0.57%
|
|
University of Victoria
16 publications, 0.57%
|
|
Washington State University
15 publications, 0.54%
|
|
Oregon State University
15 publications, 0.54%
|
|
Auburn University
14 publications, 0.5%
|
|
University of Nebraska–Lincoln
14 publications, 0.5%
|
|
University of California, Berkeley
13 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Ohio State University
13 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Kentucky
13 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Nanjing Agricultural University
12 publications, 0.43%
|
|
University of Western Australia
11 publications, 0.39%
|
|
Virginia Tech
11 publications, 0.39%
|
|
North Carolina State University
10 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Colorado State University
10 publications, 0.36%
|
|
University of Toronto
10 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Canadian Forest Service
10 publications, 0.36%
|
|
Huazhong Agricultural University
9 publications, 0.32%
|
|
University of Waterloo
9 publications, 0.32%
|
|
Ege University
7 publications, 0.25%
|
|
Wilfrid Laurier University
7 publications, 0.25%
|
|
University of Tennessee
7 publications, 0.25%
|
|
Stanford University
6 publications, 0.21%
|
|
Korea University
6 publications, 0.21%
|
|
University of Arizona
6 publications, 0.21%
|
|
Wageningen University and Research Centre
6 publications, 0.21%
|
|
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
China Agricultural University
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
University of Sydney
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
Pennsylvania State University
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
University of Melbourne
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
Dalhousie University
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
University of Chicago
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
Simon Fraser University
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
York University
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
University of Delaware
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
University of Rhode Island
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
University of Regina
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
Natural Resources Canada
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
Université du Québec à Rimouski
5 publications, 0.18%
|
|
Jiangnan University
4 publications, 0.14%
|
|
University of Ibadan
4 publications, 0.14%
|
|
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
4 publications, 0.14%
|
|
University of Göttingen
4 publications, 0.14%
|
|
University of Maryland, College Park
4 publications, 0.14%
|
|
University of Ottawa
4 publications, 0.14%
|
|
Mississippi State University
4 publications, 0.14%
|
|
Texas Tech University
4 publications, 0.14%
|
|
Utah State University
4 publications, 0.14%
|
|
Université du Québec à Montréal
4 publications, 0.14%
|
|
Zhejiang University
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
Australian National University
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
Southwestern University of Finance and Economics
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
Clemson University
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
Newcastle University
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
McMaster University
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
Queen's University at Kingston
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
Kiel University
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
Carleton University
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
Tennessee State University
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
University of Connecticut
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
University of Prince Edward Island
3 publications, 0.11%
|
|
China University of Mining and Technology
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
Technical University of Munich
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
Grenoble Alpes University
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
University of New South Wales
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
Université Catholique de Louvain
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
Zhongnan University of Economics and Law
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
University of Copenhagen
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
National Taiwan University
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
National Chung Hsing University
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
Qufu Normal University
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
Massey University
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
Lincoln University
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
La Trobe University
2 publications, 0.07%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
50
100
150
200
250
300
|
Publishing organizations in 5 years
5
10
15
20
25
30
|
|
University of Guelph
29 publications, 19.33%
|
|
University of Saskatchewan
21 publications, 14%
|
|
University of Alberta
12 publications, 8%
|
|
University of Manitoba
10 publications, 6.67%
|
|
Michigan State University
7 publications, 4.67%
|
|
Nanjing Agricultural University
5 publications, 3.33%
|
|
Huazhong Agricultural University
5 publications, 3.33%
|
|
University of British Columbia
5 publications, 3.33%
|
|
Université Laval
5 publications, 3.33%
|
|
Arizona State University
4 publications, 2.67%
|
|
University of California, Davis
4 publications, 2.67%
|
|
Virginia Tech
3 publications, 2%
|
|
Purdue University
3 publications, 2%
|
|
University of Victoria
3 publications, 2%
|
|
Zhejiang University
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
China Agricultural University
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
Southwestern University of Finance and Economics
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
Iowa State University
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
Dalhousie University
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
Washington State University
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
Auburn University
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
University of Waterloo
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
University of Göttingen
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
University of Wisconsin–Madison
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
Kansas State University
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
University of Florida
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
Texas A&M University
2 publications, 1.33%
|
|
Sichuan University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
China University of Mining and Technology
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Nanjing University of Finance and Economics
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Wuhan Institute of Technology
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Hubei University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
South China Agricultural University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Beijing Technology and Business University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Nanchang University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Xiamen University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Renmin University of China
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Zhongnan University of Economics and Law
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Guangzhou University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Southampton
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Cornell University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
North Dakota State University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Pennsylvania State University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Lincoln University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Monash University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Boston University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Korea University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
North Carolina State University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Oregon State University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
New York University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Ohio State University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Tufts University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Arizona
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Hunan University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Guangxi University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Leibniz University Hannover
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Leibniz Institute of Vegetable and Ornamental Crops
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Trinity Western University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Rhenish Friedrich Wilhelm University of Bonn
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Kiel University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Wageningen University and Research Centre
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Wilfrid Laurier University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Calgary
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Kentucky
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Mississippi State University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Joint Research Center Seville
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Delaware
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Rhode Island
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Utah State University
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Environment and Climate Change Canada
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Nebraska–Lincoln
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Université Clermont Auvergne
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
AgroParisTech
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of New Hampshire
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Tennessee
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Lethbridge
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
University of Regina
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
1 publication, 0.67%
|
|
Show all (55 more) | |
5
10
15
20
25
30
|
Publishing countries
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
|
|
Canada
|
Canada, 1080, 38.68%
Canada
1080 publications, 38.68%
|
USA
|
USA, 748, 26.79%
USA
748 publications, 26.79%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 68, 2.44%
Italy
68 publications, 2.44%
|
China
|
China, 56, 2.01%
China
56 publications, 2.01%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 37, 1.33%
Australia
37 publications, 1.33%
|
France
|
France, 36, 1.29%
France
36 publications, 1.29%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 30, 1.07%
United Kingdom
30 publications, 1.07%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 20, 0.72%
Germany
20 publications, 0.72%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 12, 0.43%
Turkey
12 publications, 0.43%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 11, 0.39%
Republic of Korea
11 publications, 0.39%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 10, 0.36%
Spain
10 publications, 0.36%
|
Nigeria
|
Nigeria, 10, 0.36%
Nigeria
10 publications, 0.36%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 10, 0.36%
Netherlands
10 publications, 0.36%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 10, 0.36%
Sweden
10 publications, 0.36%
|
India
|
India, 6, 0.21%
India
6 publications, 0.21%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 6, 0.21%
New Zealand
6 publications, 0.21%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 5, 0.18%
Belgium
5 publications, 0.18%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 5, 0.18%
Mexico
5 publications, 0.18%
|
Tanzania
|
Tanzania, 5, 0.18%
Tanzania
5 publications, 0.18%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 5, 0.18%
Japan
5 publications, 0.18%
|
Russia
|
Russia, 4, 0.14%
Russia
4 publications, 0.14%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 4, 0.14%
Israel
4 publications, 0.14%
|
Kenya
|
Kenya, 4, 0.14%
Kenya
4 publications, 0.14%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 4, 0.14%
Norway
4 publications, 0.14%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 3, 0.11%
Greece
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Georgia
|
Georgia, 3, 0.11%
Georgia
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 3, 0.11%
Denmark
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Iran
|
Iran, 3, 0.11%
Iran
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Cameroon
|
Cameroon, 3, 0.11%
Cameroon
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Mali
|
Mali, 3, 0.11%
Mali
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 3, 0.11%
Poland
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Thailand
|
Thailand, 3, 0.11%
Thailand
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Burkina Faso
|
Burkina Faso, 2, 0.07%
Burkina Faso
2 publications, 0.07%
|
Malaysia
|
Malaysia, 2, 0.07%
Malaysia
2 publications, 0.07%
|
Pakistan
|
Pakistan, 2, 0.07%
Pakistan
2 publications, 0.07%
|
Singapore
|
Singapore, 2, 0.07%
Singapore
2 publications, 0.07%
|
Philippines
|
Philippines, 2, 0.07%
Philippines
2 publications, 0.07%
|
Czech Republic
|
Czech Republic, 2, 0.07%
Czech Republic
2 publications, 0.07%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 2, 0.07%
Chile
2 publications, 0.07%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 2, 0.07%
Switzerland
2 publications, 0.07%
|
Sri Lanka
|
Sri Lanka, 2, 0.07%
Sri Lanka
2 publications, 0.07%
|
Ethiopia
|
Ethiopia, 2, 0.07%
Ethiopia
2 publications, 0.07%
|
Argentina
|
Argentina, 1, 0.04%
Argentina
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Bahrain
|
Bahrain, 1, 0.04%
Bahrain
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 1, 0.04%
Brazil
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Hungary
|
Hungary, 1, 0.04%
Hungary
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Vietnam
|
Vietnam, 1, 0.04%
Vietnam
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Ghana
|
Ghana, 1, 0.04%
Ghana
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 1, 0.04%
Ireland
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Liberia
|
Liberia, 1, 0.04%
Liberia
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Mongolia
|
Mongolia, 1, 0.04%
Mongolia
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Nepal
|
Nepal, 1, 0.04%
Nepal
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Reunion
|
Reunion, 1, 0.04%
Reunion
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Rwanda
|
Rwanda, 1, 0.04%
Rwanda
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Romania
|
Romania, 1, 0.04%
Romania
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Senegal
|
Senegal, 1, 0.04%
Senegal
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Slovenia
|
Slovenia, 1, 0.04%
Slovenia
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Trinidad and Tobago
|
Trinidad and Tobago, 1, 0.04%
Trinidad and Tobago
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Tunisia
|
Tunisia, 1, 0.04%
Tunisia
1 publication, 0.04%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 1, 0.04%
South Africa
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Show all (30 more) | |
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
|
Publishing countries in 5 years
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
|
|
Canada
|
Canada, 89, 59.33%
Canada
89 publications, 59.33%
|
USA
|
USA, 52, 34.67%
USA
52 publications, 34.67%
|
China
|
China, 22, 14.67%
China
22 publications, 14.67%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 6, 4%
Germany
6 publications, 4%
|
France
|
France, 3, 2%
France
3 publications, 2%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 2, 1.33%
Netherlands
2 publications, 1.33%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 2, 1.33%
Republic of Korea
2 publications, 1.33%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 1, 0.67%
Australia
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Burkina Faso
|
Burkina Faso, 1, 0.67%
Burkina Faso
1 publication, 0.67%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 1, 0.67%
United Kingdom
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 1, 0.67%
Greece
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 1, 0.67%
Ireland
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 1, 0.67%
Spain
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 1, 0.67%
Italy
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Cameroon
|
Cameroon, 1, 0.67%
Cameroon
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Kenya
|
Kenya, 1, 0.67%
Kenya
1 publication, 0.67%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 1, 0.67%
New Zealand
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Pakistan
|
Pakistan, 1, 0.67%
Pakistan
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 1, 0.67%
Turkey
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Czech Republic
|
Czech Republic, 1, 0.67%
Czech Republic
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 1, 0.67%
Switzerland
1 publication, 0.67%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 1, 0.67%
Sweden
1 publication, 0.67%
|
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
|