MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2296495903 · doi:10.14288/1.0058589

Environmental effects of manganese and proposed guidelines to protect freshwater life in British Columbia

2009· article· en· W2296495903 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Peter Samuel Reimer

Notice bibliographique

RevuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésManganeseEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental resource managementChemistry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Manganese is a naturally occurring substances that is present in surface waters and biota. Aquatic organisms have exhibited toxic responses to manganese in surface waters and regulatory bodies in some jurisdictions have established guidelines for levels of manganese in surface water to protect aquatic life. In British Columbia, a guideline of 0.1 mg/L was established by the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, although it was recognized that the scientific data on which this guideline was based were weak. Toxicity tests applicable to aquatic life in B.C. waters were commissioned to strengthen the relevant data base and to apply the British Columbia procedures for deriving water quality criteria in an effort to establish more defensible guidelines for the protection of aquatic life in B.C. Acute and chronic toxicity tests were conducted on fish, invertebrates and freshwater algae. Acute tests included 48 and 96 hour LC50's, while chronic tests included reproduction, growth and survival endpoints. A range of organisms was chosen in order to evaluate the range of sensitivities to manganese.. The possible relationship between water hardness and toxicity to manganese was also investigated at water hardnesses of 25, 100 and 250 mg/L CaC03. Data were also gathered from literature sources in support of the new toxicity information. Both acute and chronic studies were identified for fish species resident in B.C. fresh waters. The collective data were evaluated for suitability with respect to the B.C. water quality guideline derivation process. Toxicity t test data that met the requirements for use in guideline derivation were screened for sensitivity in order to fulfill the objective of developing a guideline protective of the most sensitive aquatic organisms. A pattern emerged whereby the concentrations of manganese at which adverse effects were observed increased with increasing water hardness. This pattern was identified in both the literature data and all but one of the new toxicity tests commissioned by the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. Acute and chronic regression equations were developed using the most sensitive data for various (in both cases six) water hardness values. The acute equation was Y = 0.044IX +1.81 and the chronic equation was Y = 0.0176 + 2.42, where X = water hardness in mg/L CaC03 and Y = Mn concentration in mg/L. The equations were used to predict manganese concentrations at water hardness increments of 25 mg/L CaC03 over the hardness range of 25-325 mg/L CaC03, a range that encompasses the vast majority of B.C. surface waters. A factor of safety of 0.25 was applied to the predicted concentrations to account for uncertainty and was based on scientific judgement and the strength of the data set used in the derivation process. The resulting acute manganese concentrations ranged from 0.6 to 3.8 mg/L and are proposed as guidelines for exposure of <96 hours. The resulting chronic manganese concentrations ranged from 0.6 to 1.9 mg/L and are proposed as guidelines for exposure exceeding 96 hours. While B.C. and other surface water data indicate that manganese rarely exceeds concentrations of 1 mg/L, it is recognized that natural events may result in periodic increases. The application of guidelines intended to protect aquatic life from anthropogenic sources of manganese should reflect this in the sampling methodology requirements.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,583
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,731

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,191
Écart entre enseignants0,183 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2009
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Même sujetWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentTravaux en français237 207