MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1950369539 · doi:10.1139/f2011-120

Regional patterns in mercury and selenium concentrations of yellowfin tuna (<i>Thunnus albacares</i>) and bigeye tuna (<i>Thunnus obesus</i>) in the Pacific Ocean

2011· article· en· W1950369539 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bridget E. Ferriss, Timothy E. Essington

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYellowfin tunaTunaThunnusMercury (programming language)AlbacoreFisheryScombridaeBiologyOceanographyFish <Actinopterygii>Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mercury (Hg) concentrations in high trophic level fish, such as bigeye tuna ( Thunnus obesus ) and yellowfin tuna ( Thunnus albacares ), can often exceed consumption advisories. Here we sampled 444 yellowfin and bigeye tuna to determine whether tuna Hg concentration varies regionally in the eastern and central Pacific Ocean and whether this variation corresponds to environmental characteristics that promote the bioavailability of Hg. Of the five regions sampled, we found significantly higher Hg concentrations in the eastern equatorial region (5°S–5°N; 110°W–120°W) for both species. Hg concentrations in this region were elevated by 0.22 and 0.17 µg·g–1for yellowfin and bigeye tuna, respectively, compared with Hg concentrations in the other regions. Tuna selenium concentrations, which may alter the toxicity of Hg, did not vary by region. Oceanographic data indicated that the eastern equatorial region had elevated chlorophyll a concentrations and shallow minimum oxygen depths, both of which promote Hg methylation. These findings suggest that methylation-promoting mechanisms may translate into regional variation in the Hg concentrations of highly mobile, high trophic level fish.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→