MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1960936719 · doi:10.1002/ieam.1696

Biokinetic food chain modeling of waterborne selenium pulses into aquatic food chains: Implications for water quality criteria

2015· review· en· W1960936719 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David K. DeForest, Suzanne M. Pargee, Carrie Claytor, Steven P. Canton, Kevin V. Brix

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and Management · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicSelenium in Biological Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRio Tinto
KeywordsSelenateBioaccumulationSeleniumFood chainEnvironmental chemistryPeriphytonWater qualityEnvironmental scienceFish <Actinopterygii>ChemistryEcologyBiologyFisheryNutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We evaluated the use of biokinetic models to predict selenium (Se) bioaccumulation into model food chains after short-term pulses of selenate or selenite into water. Both periphyton- and phytoplankton-based food chains were modeled, with Se trophically transferred to invertebrates and then to fish. Whole-body fish Se concentrations were predicted based on 1) the background waterborne Se concentration, 2) the magnitude of the Se pulse, and 3) the duration of the Se pulse. The models were used to evaluate whether the US Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA's) existing acute Se criteria and their recently proposed intermittent Se criteria would be protective of a whole-body fish Se tissue-based criterion of 8.1 μg g-1 dry wt. Based on a background waterborne Se concentration of 1 μg L-1 and pulse durations of 1 d and 4 d, the Se pulse concentrations predicted to result in a whole-body fish Se concentration of 8.1 μg g-1 dry wt in the most conservative model food chains were 144 and 35 μg L-1, respectively, for selenate and 57 and 16 μg L-1, respectively, for selenite. These concentrations fall within the range of various acute Se criteria recommended by the USEPA based on direct waterborne toxicity, suggesting that these criteria may not always be protective against bioaccumulation-based toxicity that could occur after short-term pulses. Regarding the USEPA's draft intermittent Se criteria, the biokinetic modeling indicates that they may be overly protective for selenate pulses but potentially underprotective for selenite pulses. Predictions of whole-body fish Se concentrations were highly dependent on whether the food chain was periphyton- or phytoplankton-based, because the latter had much greater Se uptake rate constants. Overall, biokinetic modeling provides an approach for developing acute Se criteria that are protective against bioaccumulation-based toxicity after trophic transfer, and it is also a useful tool for evaluating averaging periods for chronic Se criteria. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:230–246. © 2015 SETAC Key Points Biokinetic modeling of Se in model aquatic food chains provides a valuable tool for evaluating whether acute water quality criteria based on direct Se toxicity may be protective of bioaccumulation-based toxicity in fish. Biokinetic Se models provide a promising tool for temporally colocating Se concentrations in multiple food chain components as part of field monitoring programs in support of Se bioaccumulation modeling, especially for time-varying and/or seasonal changes in waterborne Se concentrations. Biokinetic data for Se at the base of the aquatic chain are limited to 2 periphyton assemblages and 1 phytoplankton species; biokinetic Se data for additional components at the base of the food chain are needed to broaden our understanding of how Se biokinetics varies in different food chains. Se uptake and elimination rates are not constant over a range of Se concentrations in water or diets, and Se biokinetics under varying bioavailability conditions have not been conducted to-date—evaluating these variables should be a focus of future biokinetic Se studies.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and ManagementSame topicSelenium in Biological SystemsFrench-language works237,207