Review on DDT and metabolites in birds and mammals of aquatic ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interdisciplinary research regarding the pesticide DDT has been ongoing since its synthesis in 1874, with thousands of publications appearing in the literature. The present review, on the 50th anniversary of the publication of Silent Spring by Rachel Carson, examines the state of knowledge regarding the presence and toxicity of DDT in two groups of top predators in the aquatic environment, mammals and birds. The objective is to outline the essential chemical information available on the fate of this most renowned persistent organic pollutant in the context of other lipophilic contaminants, as much in terms of the abiotic environment as for the tissue distribution of DDT derivatives. The facts associated with bioaccumulation and biotransformation as well as linkages to more and less known toxic effects are presented. The discussion highlights the better understanding derived from bird investigations initiated owing to the discovery of avian reproductive effects, in contrast to the challenges faced in research on marine mammals. Eggshell thinning was observed when there were fewer industrial chemicals in use, while in the 21st century the plethora of xenobiotics entering the food web increased exponentially. A discussion of sediment quality guidelines as well as tissue guidelines is presented to explain the derivation of threshold concentrations for toxic effects. Recommendations are made to continue research on environmental contaminants entering the food chain, covering more POP and relevant toxic endpoints. Developments to replace DDT are highlighted alongside the cautionary principle, plus the regulation program launched in Europe in 2002 that will be implemented in 2020 to replace harmful chemicals.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".