MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965152879 · doi:10.1897/07-310r.1

Estimating metabolic biotransformation rates in fish from laboratory data

2008· article· en· W1965152879 on OpenAlexaff
Jon A. Arnot, Don Mackay, Mark Bonnell

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioconcentrationBiotransformationBioaccumulationPartition coefficientReaction rate constantChemistryEnvironmental chemistryReaction rateElimination rate constantChromatographyKineticsOrganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method is proposed for estimating metabolic biotransformation rate constants for nonionic organic chemicals from measured laboratory bioconcentration and dietary bioaccumulation data in fish. Data have been selected based on a quality review to reduce uncertainty in the measured values. A kinetic mass balance model is used to estimate rates of chemical uptake and elimination. Biotransformation rate constants are essentially calculated as the difference between two quantities, a measured bioconcentration factor or elimination rate constant, and a model-derived bioconcentration factor or elimination rate constant estimated assuming no biotransformation. Model parameterization exploits key empirical data when they are available and assumes default values when study specific data are unavailable. Uncertainty analyses provide screening level assessments for confidence in the biotransformation rate constant estimates. The uncertainty analyses include the range for 95% of the predicted values and 95% confidence intervals for the calculated biotransformation values. Case studies are provided to illustrate the calculation and uncertainty methods. Biotransformation rate constants calculated by the proposed method are compared with other published estimates for 31 chemicals that range in octanol-water partition coefficients from approximately 10(1) to 10(8) and represent over four orders of magnitude in biotransformation potential. The comparison of previously published values with those calculated by the proposed method shows general agreement with 82% of the estimated values falling within a factor of three.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0050.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations141
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Toxicology and ChemistrySame topicToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactFrench-language works237,207