MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of Waste - Dumping Site on Water Quality of Ado-Ekiti Metropolis, Southwestern Nigeria

2014· article· en· W19026666 on OpenAlexfundno aff
A. E. Adetoro, O O Popoola

Bibliographic record

VenueIJEIR · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDefence Science and Technology GroupMinistry of Education - SingaporeCancer Research Society
KeywordsDumpingQuality (philosophy)Water qualityWater resource managementEnvironmental scienceBusinessWaste managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental protectionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hexavalent chromium (Cr[VI]) is a toxic environmental contaminant that is capable of producing a broad spectrum of DNA damage. The ability of Cr[VI] to induce mutagenesis and neoplastic transformation has been attributed to its genotoxic action, however our understanding of molecular mechanisms involved in the repair of Cr[VI]-induced DNA damage remains incomplete. Here, we report that Mus81, an enzyme that participates with Eme1 in the resolution of replication fork damage caused by certain lesions, is involved in the repair of Cr[VI]-induced DNA damage. Mus81-deficient cells were found to be more susceptible to Cr[VI]-induced proliferation arrest and more sensitive to the long-term cytotoxic effects of Cr[VI] than isogenic wild-type cells. Following Cr[VI] exposure, Mus81-deficient cells displayed a lag in the disappearance of Rad51 foci, exhibited elevated replication-associated gamma-H2AX and showed an increased incidence of chromosomal instability compared to wild-type cells. Our findings support a role for Mus81 in the resolution of replication-associated DNA damage associated with this genotoxic agent, by converting Cr[VI]-DNA lesions into a form more amenable for homologous recombination.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIJEIRSame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207