MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970183843 · doi:10.1021/es303393z

Brominated and Chlorinated Flame Retardants in Tree Bark from Around the Globe

2012· article· en· W1970183843 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amina Salamova, Ronald A. Hites

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBark (sound)Environmental scienceFire retardantEnvironmental chemistryWaste managementTree (set theory)ChemistryEngineeringForestryGeographyOrganic chemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brominated and chlorinated flame retardants were measured in about 40 samples of tree bark from 12 locations around the globe. The analytes were polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE), Dechlorane Plus (DP), decabromodiphenylethane (DBDPE), hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD), hexabromobenzene (HBB), pentabromoethylbenzene (PBEB), pentabromobenzene (PBBz), and tetrabromo-p-xylene (pTBX). The highest concentrations of these compounds were detected at an urban site in Downsview, Ontario, Canada. Total PBDE and DP concentrations ranged from 2.1 to 190 ng/g lipid weight and from 0.89 to 48 ng/g lipid weight, respectively. Relatively high levels of DP (46 ± 4 ng/g lipid weight) were found at a remote site at Bukit Kototabang in Indonesia. The concentrations of total PBDE, DP, PBEB, and HBCD in the tree bark samples were significantly associated with human population in the nearby areas (r(2) = 0.21-0.56; P < 0.05). In addition, the concentrations of total PBDE and DP were significantly associated (r(2) = 0.40-0.64; P < 0.05). with the corresponding atmospheric concentrations of these compounds over a concentration range of 2-3 orders of magnitude.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.202 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations96
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactFrench-language works237,207