Development of a total dissolved solids (TDS) chronic effects benchmark for a northern Canadian lake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Laboratory chronic toxicity tests with plankton, benthos, and fish early life stages were conducted with total dissolved solids (TDS) at an ionic composition specific to Snap Lake (Northwest Territories, Canada), which receives treated effluent from the Snap Lake Diamond Mine. Snap Lake TDS composition has remained consistent from 2007 to 2014 and is expected to remain unchanged through the life of the mine: Cl (45%–47%), Ca (20%–21%), Na (10%–11%), sulfate (9%); carbonate (5%–7%), nitrate (4%), Mg (2%–3%), and minor contributions from K and fluoride. The TDS concentrations that resulted in negligible effects (i.e., 10% or 20% effect concentrations) to taxa representative of resident biota ranged from greater than 1100 to greater than 2200 mg/L, with the exception of a 21% effect concentration of 990 mg/L for 1 of 2 early life stage fish dry fertilization tests (wet fertilization results were >1480 mg/L). A conservative, site-specific, chronic effects benchmark for Snap Lake TDS of 1000 mg/L was derived, below the lowest negligible effect concentration for the most sensitive resident taxon tested, the cladoceran, Daphnia magna (>1100 mg/L). Cladocerans typically only constitute a few percent of the zooplankton community and biomass in Snap Lake; other plankton effect concentrations ranged from greater than 1330 to greater than 1510 mg/L. Chironomids, representative of the lake benthos, were not affected by greater than 1380 mg/L TDS. Early life stage tests with 3 fish species resulted in 10% to 20% effect concentrations ranging from greater than 1410 to greater than 2200 mg/L. The testing undertaken is generally applicable to northern freshwaters, and the concept can readily be adapted to other freshwaters either for TDS where ionic composition does not change or for major ionic components, where TDS composition does change. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:371–379. © 2015 SETAC Key Points Total dissolved solids from mining increasing in a northern Canadian lake. Novel site-specific toxicity testing conducted to determine a protective chronic effects benchmark. Resident taxa tested representing all components of the food chain (benthos, plankton, fish). Chronic effects benchmark of 1,000 mg/L will protect lake function while allowing mining to continue.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".