Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Reply to the letter to the editor by Swarthout et al. (2018): Comments for Mertens et al. (2018), Glyphosate, a chelating agent—relevant for ecological risk assessment?

Reply to the letter to the editor by Swarthout et al. (2018): Comments for Mertens et al. (2018),... Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2018) 25:27664–27666 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2440-1 LETTER TO THE EDITOR Reply to the letter to the editor by Swarthout et al. (2018): Comments for Mertens et al. (2018), Glyphosate, a chelating agent—relevant for ecological risk assessment? 1 1 2 2 3 Martha Mertens & Sebastian Höss & Günter Neumann & Joshua Afzal & Wolfram Reichenbecher Received: 14 May 2018 / Accepted: 28 May 2018 / Published online: 3 June 2018 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018 In their letter to the editor, Swarthout and colleagues Because of this we accept the critique that our statement (Swarthout et al. 2018) comment on our publication BGlyphosate is also known as a potent chelator for min- BGlyphosate, a chelating agent—relevant for ecological risk erals, a property that has been observed decades ago assessment?^ (Mertens et al. 2018), and criticize several is- (Toy and Uhing 1964)^ is misleading. We regret this sues that we want to refute with this response item by item: imprecision; however, we don’t accept the general accusation that Mertens et al. (2018)relied onsec- & BGlyphosate was not patented as chelator^: In their letter ondary sources instead of reading the original papers to the editor, Swarthout http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Environmental Science and Pollution Research Springer Journals

Reply to the letter to the editor by Swarthout et al. (2018): Comments for Mertens et al. (2018), Glyphosate, a chelating agent—relevant for ecological risk assessment?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/reply-to-the-letter-to-the-editor-by-swarthout-et-al-2018-comments-for-Y8fEVzfoIQ
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 by Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature
Subject
Environment; Environment, general; Environmental Chemistry; Ecotoxicology; Environmental Health; Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution; Waste Water Technology / Water Pollution Control / Water Management / Aquatic Pollution
ISSN
0944-1344
eISSN
1614-7499
DOI
10.1007/s11356-018-2440-1
pmid
29862477
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2018) 25:27664–27666 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2440-1 LETTER TO THE EDITOR Reply to the letter to the editor by Swarthout et al. (2018): Comments for Mertens et al. (2018), Glyphosate, a chelating agent—relevant for ecological risk assessment? 1 1 2 2 3 Martha Mertens & Sebastian Höss & Günter Neumann & Joshua Afzal & Wolfram Reichenbecher Received: 14 May 2018 / Accepted: 28 May 2018 / Published online: 3 June 2018 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018 In their letter to the editor, Swarthout and colleagues Because of this we accept the critique that our statement (Swarthout et al. 2018) comment on our publication BGlyphosate is also known as a potent chelator for min- BGlyphosate, a chelating agent—relevant for ecological risk erals, a property that has been observed decades ago assessment?^ (Mertens et al. 2018), and criticize several is- (Toy and Uhing 1964)^ is misleading. We regret this sues that we want to refute with this response item by item: imprecision; however, we don’t accept the general accusation that Mertens et al. (2018)relied onsec- & BGlyphosate was not patented as chelator^: In their letter ondary sources instead of reading the original papers to the editor, Swarthout

Journal

Environmental Science and Pollution ResearchSpringer Journals

Published: Jun 3, 2018

References