Assessing the Chemical Sensitivity of Freshwater Fish Commonly Used in Toxicological Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Using information from published studies, the relative sensitivity of various freshwater fish to a range of chemicals was examined. Specifically, the objectives were to: (1) determine which species are used most often in toxicity tests, (2) assess the relative sensitivity of these species to various chemicals, and (3) determine whether the two most commonly tested species exhibit differences in their relative sensitivity to different classes of chemicals. Fathead minnows, rainbow trout and bluegill sunfish were the three most commonly used species in 96-h LC50 tests. Of the nine species examined, coho salmon and rainbow trout were the most sensitive species to 190 chemicals, while goldfish and carp were the least sensitive. Fathead minnows and rainbow trout were not equally sensitive to 13 different classes of chemicals; for example, while trout were significantly more sensitive to metals, fathead minnows were more sensitive to hydrocarbons. Such comparisons are expected to be useful for predicting the relative responses of different species to previously untested chemicals in such groups, and in gaining insight into physiological modes of action.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".