MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968612687 · doi:10.1021/es100549v

Metolachlor and Atrazine in the Great Lakes

2010· article· en· W1968612687 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Perihan Binnur Kurt-Karakuş, Derek C. G. Muir, Terry F. Bidleman, Jeff Small, Sean Backus, Alice Dove

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHealth CanadaUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsMetolachlorAtrazinePesticideEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryHydrology (agriculture)ChemistryEcologyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concentrations of atrazine and metolachlor and stereoisomer fractions (SF = herbicidally active/total stereoisomers) of metolachlor were determined in 101 surface water samples collected from the five Laurentian Great Lakes in 2005-2006. Geometric mean (GM) concentrations of atrazine ranged from 5.5 to 61 ng L(-1), decreasing from lakes Ontario approximately Michigan approximately Erie > Huron > Superior, while metolachlor concentrations ranged from 0.28 to 14 ng L(-1) and showed similar trends among the lakes. Median SFs ranged from 0.527 (Superior) to 0.844 (Erie) with an overall value of 0.708, and were significantly different among the Great Lakes (p < 0.05), except for Michigan vs Huron and Michigan vs Ontario. The SF in Erie was closest to that of the dominant product in use, S-metolachlor (SF = 0.880), while Superior showed an SF similar to that of racemic metolachlor (SF = 0.500). The median SFs in lakes Ontario, Huron and Erie were significantly lower than the median SF in Ontario stream samples collected in 2006-2007. The lower SFs in lakes suggest in-lake stereoselective processing of metolachlor or hold-up of older racemic metolachlor residues.

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 score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations29
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicPesticide and Herbicide Environmental StudiesFrench-language works237,207