A fish kill related to an acid-metal spill (Little Sackville River, Nova Scotia, Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper documents the aqueous transport of acidic drainage in the Little and Main Sackville Rivers in Nova Scotia, and contributes to a better general understanding of the movement and duration of impact in such an event. Acidic drainage has been often noted as a major environmental hazard in mainland Nova Scotia. In addition to the details of the distribution and dispersal of metal concentrations in the Sackville Rivers ecosystem, some of the effects upon the aquatic organisms in the area are presented. Both an automated and hand-held devices were used to obtain physical water quality both prior to and after the event. The environmental impacts of the contaminant are discussed in terms of their immediate effects. The immediate effects in the mixing zone, where toxicity occurred, were at the entrance of the acid-bearing outflow, where there was a presence of mixing with the higher pH waters in the main channel. More than 4000 dead fish were counted (including approximately 300 American eels (Anguilla rostrata), 1000 one-year-old salmon (Salmo salar), 150 two-year-old salmon, 24 small-mouth bass (Micropterus dolmieui) and 24 suckers (Catostomus commersonii), in addition to minnows (specific species unidentified), small gaspereau (Alosa pseudoharengus), brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), freshwater mussels (specific species unidentified), and a snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina). It is most likely that the fish kill resulted from rapid suffocation due to metal flocculants clogging the gills. It was in this zone where dissolved metals precipitated (Al, Fe, Cu).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".