Expanding metal mixture toxicity models to natural stream and lake invertebrate communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A modeling approach that was used to predict the toxicity of dissolved single and multiple metals to trout is extended to stream benthic macroinvertebrates, freshwater zooplankton, and Daphnia magna. The approach predicts the accumulation of toxicants (H, Al, Cd, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Zn) in organisms using 3 equilibrium accumulation models that define interactions between dissolved cations and biological receptors (biotic ligands). These models differ in the structure of the receptors and include a 2-site biotic ligand model, a bidentate biotic ligand or 2-pKa model, and a humic acid model. The predicted accumulation of toxicants is weighted using toxicant-specific coefficients and incorporated into a toxicity function called Tox, which is then related to observed mortality or invertebrate community richness using a logistic equation. All accumulation models provide reasonable fits to metal concentrations in tissue samples of stream invertebrates. Despite the good fits, distinct differences in the magnitude of toxicant accumulation and biotic ligand speciation exist among the models for a given solution composition. However, predicted biological responses are similar among the models because there are interdependencies among model parameters in the accumulation-Tox models. To illustrate potential applications of the approaches, the 3 accumulation-Tox models for natural stream invertebrates are used in Monte Carlo simulations to predict the probability of adverse impacts in catchments of differing geology in central Colorado (USA); to link geology, water chemistry, and biological response; and to demonstrate how this approach can be used to screen for potential risks associated with resource development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".